The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Methylphenidate vs Dextroamphetamine vs Caffeine in Minimal Brain Dysfunction: Controlled Comparison by Placebo Washout Design With Bayes' Analysis
Abstract
Double-blind crossover comparison of methylphenidate hydrochloride, dextroamphetamine sulfate, and caffeine after placebo washout in 29 children with minimal brain dysfunction (MBD) showed on six ratings that methylphenidate and dextroamphetamine were significantly (P less than .05 to P less than .001) better than placebo and caffeine, but not significantly (P less than .05) different from each other. Placebo, caffeine, and ratings before drug did not differ significantly. Of 26 drug responders, 12 responded best to dextroamphetamine, ten to methylphenidate, and one to caffeine. The latter child showed no improvement at all with either prescription stimulant. Methylphenidate and dextroamphetamine were each efficacious for six children who did not respond to the other stimulant. All three drugs showed significant (P less than .05) weight loss and cardiovascular side effects, the latter possibly spurious. Dextroamphetamine showed a significant (P less than .05) decrease from placebo in "tummyaches."
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“In 2 separate crossover studies [31,32] comparing the efficacy of MPH and dextroamphetamine, most children with ADHD who did not respond to 1 stimulant responded to the other.”
Citations
Cites
A Teacher Rating Scale for Use in Drug Studies with Children
Conners, C. K. (1969) · American Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1176/ajp.126.6.884 · Cited by 1,758
Sprague, R. L., & Sleator, E. K. (1977) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.337493 · Cited by 441
A Bayesian Approach to Multiple Comparisons
Duncan, D. B. (1965) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1965.10490249 · Cited by 180
The "One Child, One Drug" Myth of Stimulants in Hyperkinesis
Fish, B. (1971) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1971.01750150001001 · Cited by 109
Levoamphetamine and Dextroamphetamine: Comparative Efficacy in the Hyperkinetic Syndrome
Arnold, L. E. (1972) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1972.01750300078015 · Cited by 102
Self-citationCaffeine as a Substitute for Schedule II Stimulants in Hyperkinetic Children
Schnackenberg, R. C. (1973) · American Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1176/ajp.130.7.796 · Cited by 102
Conners, C. K., Taylor, E. A., Meo, G., Kurtz, M. A., & Fournier, M. (1972) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/bf00421898 · Cited by 100
Ck, C. (1972) · PubMed · Cited by 93
An Objective Instrument for Assessing Hyperkinesis in Children
DAVIDS, A. (1971) · Journal of Learning Disabilities · doi:10.1177/002221947100400907 · Cited by 88
Weiss, G., MINDE, K. K., Douglas, V. I., WERRY, J. S., & Sykes, D. H. (1971) · PubMed Central · Cited by 75
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Greenhill, L. L., Pliszka, S., & Dulcan, M. K. (2002) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/00004583-200202001-00003 · Cited by 927
Comparing the efficacy of stimulants for ADHD in children and adolescents using meta-analysis
Faraone, S. V., & Buitelaar, J. (2010) · European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1007/s00787-009-0054-3 · Cited by 485
Medication treatment strategies in the MTA Study: relevance to clinicians and researchers
GREENHILL, L. L., ABIKOFF, H. B., ARNOLD, L. E., CANTWELL, D. P., CONNERS, C. K., ELLIOTT, G., HECHTMAN, L., HINSHAW, S. P., HOZA, B., JENSEN, P. S., et al. (1996) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/00004583-199610000-00017 · Cited by 297
Self-citationMethylphenidate and dextroamphetamine treatments of hyperactivity: Are there true nonresponders?
Elia, J., Borcherding, B. G., Rapoport, J. L., & Keysor, C. S. (1991) · Psychiatry Research · doi:10.1016/0165-1781(91)90126-a · Cited by 294
Richters, J., Arnold, L. E., Jensen, P., Abikoff, H., Conners, C., Greenhill, L. L., Hechtman, L., Hinshaw, S. P., Pelham, W., & Swanson, J. M. (1995) · Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/00004583-199508000-00008 · Cited by 299
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Arnold, L. E.
- Corresponding author
- Arnold, L. Eugene
- ORCID
- Arnold, L. Eugene
- Venue
- Archives of General Psychiatry
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 1978-04-01
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 463
- ISSN
- 0003-990X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2142349212
- Cited by
- 104
- References
- 23
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2018: 5 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 2.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Archives of General Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Keywords
- methylphenidate, d-amphetamine, caffeine, minimal brain dysfunction, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, stimulants, children, drug efficacy, placebo response, weight loss, cardiovascular side effects
- MeSH terms
- Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Caffeine, Child, Child, Preschool, Clinical Trials as Topic, Dextroamphetamine, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Double-Blind Method, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Hyperkinesis, Male, Methylphenidate
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
