ArticleNeurology and therapy2026
Treatment Preferences of Physicians of Pediatric Patients with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in the United States and Canada: A Discrete Choice Experiment.
Article in Neurology and therapy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEvidence on how treatment attributes, especially adverse events, influence preferences of physicians treating pediatric patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is scant. This discrete choice experiment aimed to address this evidence gap.
methodsA web-based survey was completed by physicians treating pediatric patients with ADHD in the United States (US) and Canada recruited from a market research firm's panel (12/2024-01/2025). Treatment attributes evaluated included efficacy (improvement in ADHD symptoms) and safety (irritability, upper abdominal pain, insomnia, somnolence, decreased appetite, vomiting), identified from clinical inputs and published data. Physicians' preferences and willingness to trade-off were estimated using conditional logistic regression. Attributes' relative importance was assessed. Subgroups were stratified by physician subspecialty and by patients' age group.
resultsThe sample included 404 physicians in the US and 402 in Canada (50.2% and 49.8% psychiatrists, respectively). US physicians were on average willing to trade 0.42, 0.36, 0.34, 0.32, and 0.22 percentage points of improvement in ADHD symptoms to achieve a 1-percentage-point reduction in the risk of irritability, upper abdominal pain, insomnia, somnolence, and decreased appetite, respectively, with similar ranges for Canadian physicians (0.22-0.38). In the US, the relative importance of efficacy and that of all safety-related attributes assessed was both 50.0%, whereas, in Canada, this was 53.7% and 46.3%, respectively. In both countries, the most important safety-related attributes were the risks of insomnia (US: 14.5%; Canada: 12.5%), somnolence (US: 13.7%; Canada: 11.0%), and decreased appetite (US: 10.6%; Canada: 11.4%). Psychiatrists placed greater relative importance on efficacy compared to primary care physicians/pediatricians. Findings were consistent when physicians considered treating children and adolescents.
conclusionUS and Canadian physicians valued efficacy and safety similarly when considering pediatric ADHD treatments, with some differences by subspecialty. Understanding drivers of physician preferences and how they may diverge from that of parents/caregivers may facilitate informed discussions and effective shared decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42745129What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.