Cited by 240Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderBehavioral and Psychological StudiesChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

National Institute of Mental Health Collaborative Multimodal Treatment Study of Children With ADHD (the MTA): Design Challenges and Choices

Arnold, L. Eugene·1997·Archives of General Psychiatry

Abstract

The Collaborative Multimodal Treatment Study of Children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), the MTA, is the first child multisite cooperative agreement treatment study of children conducted by the National Institute of Mental Health, Rockville, Md. It examines the long-term effectiveness of medication vs behavioral treatment vs both for treatment of ADHD and compares state-of-the-art treatment with routine community care. In a parallel-groups design, 576 children (age, 7-9 years) with ADHD (96 at each site) are thoroughly assessed and randomized to 4 conditions: (1) medication alone, (2) psychosocial treatment alone, (3) the combination of both, (4) or community comparison. The first 3 groups are treated for 14 months and all are reassessed periodically for 24 months. Designers met the following challenges: framing clinically relevant primary questions; defining the target population; choice, intensity, and integration and combination of treatments for fair comparisons; combining scientific controls and standardization with clinical flexibility; and implementing a controlled clinical trial in a nonclinical setting (school) controlled by others. Innovative solutions included extensive decision algorithms and manualized adaptations of treatments to specific needs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archpsyc.1997.01830210113015

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Arnold, L. E.
Affiliations
National Institute of Mental Health (US)
Corresponding author
Arnold, L. Eugene
Venue
Archives of General Psychiatry
Published
1997-09-01
Volume
54
Issue
9
Pages
865
ISSN
0003-990X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2157719972
Cited by
240
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
14.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Archives of General Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (UO1 MH50461, UO1 MH50440, U01MH050447, U01MH050440, UO1 MH50447, U01MH050461)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, children, multimodal therapy, stimulant medication, behavior therapy, psychosocial interventions, combination therapy, community-based care, long-term treatment effectiveness, decision-making algorithm, target population definition
MeSH terms
Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Behavior Therapy, Child, Clinical Protocols, Combined Modality Therapy, Decision Making, Dextroamphetamine, Female, Health Policy, Health Services Research, Humans, Imipramine, Male, Methylphenidate, National Institute of Mental Health (U.S.), Pemoline, Research Design, United States, Patient Selection

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