Search

BackgroundMisconceptions about ADHD stigmatize affected people, reduce credibility of providers, and prevent/delay treatment. To challenge misconceptions, we curated findings with strong evidence base.MethodsWe reviewed studies with more than 2000 participants or meta-analyses from five or more studies or 2000 or more participants. We excluded meta-analyses that did not assess publication bias, except for meta-analyses of prevalence. For network meta-analyses we required comparison adjusted funnel plots. We excluded treatment studies with waiting-list or treatment as usual controls. From this literature, we extracted evidence-based assertions about the disorder.ResultsWe generated 208 empirically supported statements about ADHD. The status of the included statements as empirically supported is approved by 80 authors from 27 countries and 6 continents. The contents of the manuscript are endorsed by 366 people who have read this document and agree with its contents.ConclusionsMany findings in ADHD are supported by meta-analysis. These allow for firm statements about the nature, course, outcome causes, and treatments for disorders that are useful for reducing misconceptions and stigma.

Abstract Background Our objective was to determine antioxidant defence activity in healthy controls (HC) and healthy unaffected second-degree relatives of patients with early onset psychosis (HC-FHP), and to assess its relationship with familiar environment measured using the Family Environment Scale (FES). Methods We included 82 HC and 14 HC-FHP aged between 9 and 17 years. Total antioxidant status, lipid peroxidation, antioxidant enzyme activities and glutathione levels were determined in blood samples. Results There was a significant decrease in the total antioxidant level in the HC-FHP group compared with the HC group (OR = 2.94; p = 0.009), but no between-group differences in the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scale scores. For the FES, the HC-FHP group had significantly higher scores in the cohesion (p = 0.007) and intellectual-cultural dimensions (p=0.025). After adjusting for these two FES dimensions, total antioxidant status remained significantly different between groups (OR = 10.86, p = 0.009). Conclusions Although causal relationships cannot be assumed, we can state that family environment is not playing a role in inducing oxidative stress in these healthy subjects. It could be hypothesized that families with affected relatives protect themselves from psychosis with positive environmental factors such as cohesion and intellectual-cultural activities.

Background: Following the approval of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) in several European countries for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents with an inadequate response to methylphenidate (MPH) treatment, the aim of the present analysis was to establish the response to LDX in subgroups of patients with different ADHD medication histories. Methods: This was a post hoc subgroup analysis of data from a 7-week, European, doubleblind, dose-optimized, Phase III study. Patients aged 6-17 years were randomized 1:1:1 to LDX, placebo, or osmotic-release oral system methylphenidate (OROS-MPH). OROS-MPH was included as a reference arm rather than as a direct comparator. Efficacy was assessed in patients categorized according to their ADHD medication history using the ADHD Rating Scale IV and Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I) scores. Results: The difference between active drug and placebo in least-squares mean change from baseline to endpoint in ADHD Rating Scale IV total score (95% confidence interval) was similar between the overall study population (n=317; LDX, -18.6 [-21.5, -15.7]; OROSMPH, -13.0 [-15.9, -10.2]) and treatment-naïve individuals (n=147; LDX, -15.1 [-19.4, -10.9]; OROS-MPH, -12.7 [-16.8, -8.5]) or patients previously treated with any ADHD medication (n=170; LDX, -21.5 [-25.5, -17.6]; OROS-MPH, -14.2 [-18.1, -10.3]). In addition, similar proportions of patients receiving active treatment were categorized as improved based on CGI-I score (CGI-I of 1 or 2) in the overall study population and among treatment-naïve individuals or patients previously treated with any ADHD medication. Conclusion: In these post hoc analyses, the response to LDX treatment, and to the reference treatment OROS-MPH, was similar to that observed for the overall study population in subgroups of patients categorized according to whether or not they had previously received ADHD medication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common neurodevelopmental condition in childhood (5.3% to 7.1% worldwide prevalence), with substantial overall financial burden to children/adolescents, their families, and society. The aims of this study were to describe the clinical characteristics of children and adolescents with ADHD in Spain, estimate the associated direct/indirect costs of the disorder, and assess whether the characteristics and financial costs differed between children/adolescents adequately responding to currently available pharmacotherapies compared with children/adolescents for whom pharmacotherapies failed., Methods: This was a multicenter, cross-sectional, descriptive analysis conducted in 15 health units representative of the overall Spanish population. Data on demographic characteristics, socio-occupational status, social relationships, clinical variables of the disease, and pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments received were collected in 321 children and adolescents with ADHD. Direct and indirect costs were estimated over one year from both a health care system and a societal perspective., Results: The estimated average cost of ADHD per year per child/adolescent was €5733 in 2012 prices; direct costs accounted for 60.2% of the total costs (€3450). Support from a psychologist/educational psychologist represented 45.2% of direct costs and 27.2% of total costs. Pharmacotherapy accounted for 25.8% of direct costs and 15.5% of total costs. Among indirect costs (€2283), 65.2% was due to caregiver expenses. The total annual costs were significantly higher for children/adolescents who responded poorly to pharmacological treatment (€7654 versus €5517; P = 0.024), the difference being mainly due to significantly higher direct costs, particularly with larger expenses for non-pharmacological treatment (P = 0.012)., Conclusions: ADHD has a significant personal, familial, and financial impact on the Spanish health system and society. Successful pharmacological intervention was associated with lower overall expenses in the management of the disorder.