Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33085721›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2020

Pharmacologic treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in adults: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Jesse Elliott, Amy Johnston, Don Husereau, Shannon E Kelly, Caroline Eagles, Alice Charach, Shu-Ching Hsieh, Zemin Bai, Alomgir Hossain, Becky Skidmore and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 76 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Evaluation of the effectiveness of the FOCUS ADHD App in monitoring adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2023
    Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Modafinil, an atypical CNS stimulant?Advances in pharmacology (San Diego, Calif.) · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jesse ElliottCardiovascular Research Methods Centre, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2501-1641
Amy JohnstonSchool of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-1934-7867
Don HusereauSchool of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Shannon E KellyCardiovascular Research Methods Centre, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Caroline EaglesCardiovascular Research Methods Centre, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Alice CharachDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Shu-Ching HsiehCardiovascular Research Methods Centre, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Zemin BaiCardiovascular Research Methods Centre, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Alomgir HossainCardiovascular Research Methods Centre, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Becky SkidmoreIndependent Information Specialist, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8293-9238
Eva TsakonasIndependent Research Consultant, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Dagmara ChojeckiIndependent Information Specialist, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Muhammad MamdaniLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
George A WellsCardiovascular Research Methods Centre, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
University of Ottawa · CASt. Michael's Hospital · CAUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAttention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) affects approximately 3% of adults globally. Many pharmacologic treatments options exist, yet the comparative benefits and harms of individual treatments are largely unknown. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to assess the relative effects of individual pharmacologic treatments for adults with ADHD.

methodsWe searched English-language published and grey literature sources for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) involving pharmacologic treatment of ADHD in adults (December 2018). The primary outcome was clinical response; secondary outcomes were quality of life, executive function, driving behaviour, withdrawals due to adverse events, treatment discontinuation, serious adverse events, hospitalization, cardiovascular adverse events, and emergency department visits. Data were pooled via pair-wise meta-analyses and Bayesian network meta-analyses. Risk of bias was assessed by use of Cochrane's Risk of Bias tool, and the certainty of the evidence was assessed by use of the GRADE framework.

resultsEighty-one unique trials that reported at least one outcome of interest were included, most of which were at high or unclear risk of at least one important source of bias. Notably, only 5 RCTs were deemed at overall low risk of bias. Included pharmacotherapies were methylphenidate, atomoxetine, dexamfetamine, lisdexamfetamine, guanfacine, bupropion, mixed amphetamine salts, and modafinil. As a class, ADHD pharmacotherapy improved patient- and clinician-reported clinical response compared with placebo (range: 4 to 15 RCTs per outcome); however, these findings were not conserved when the analyses were restricted to studies at low risk of bias, and the certainty of the finding is very low. There were few differences among individual medications, although atomoxetine was associated with improved patient-reported clinical response and quality of life compared with placebo. There was no significant difference in the risk of serious adverse events or treatment discontinuation between ADHD pharmacotherapies and placebo; however, the proportion of participants who withdrew due to adverse events was significantly higher among participants who received any ADHD pharmacotherapy. Few RCTs reported on the occurrence of adverse events over a long treatment duration.

conclusionsOverall, despite a class effect of improving clinical response relative to placebo, there were few differences among the individual ADHD pharmacotherapies, and most studies were at risk of at least one important source of bias. Furthermore, the certainty of the evidence was very low to low for all outcomes, and there was limited reporting of long-term adverse events. As such, the choice between ADHD pharmacotherapies may depend on individual patient considerations, and future studies should assess the long-term effects of individual pharmacotherapies on patient-important outcomes, including quality of life, in robust blinded RCTs. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO no. CRD 42015026049.

Indexed as

AdultAmphetamineAtomoxetine HydrochlorideAttention Deficit Disorder with HyperactivityBayes TheoremBupropionCentral Nervous System StimulantsDextroamphetamineDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsFemaleGuanfacineHumansLisdexamfetamine DimesylateMaleMethylphenidateModafinilAmphetamineAtomoxetine HydrochlorideBupropionCentral Nervous System StimulantsDextroamphetamineGuanfacineLisdexamfetamine DimesylateMethylphenidateModafinil

Identifiers

PMID33085721
PMCPMC7577505
OpenAlexW3094583822

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.