Cited by 23Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome ResearchLong-Term Effects of COVID-19Coenzyme Q10 studies and effects

Use of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in treatment of executive functioning deficits and chronic fatigue syndrome: A double blind, placebo-controlled study

Young, Joel L.·2013·Psychiatry Research

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) for the treatment of executive functioning deficits in adults (ages 18-60) with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). The study's primary outcome measure was the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Adult (BRIEF-A). Secondary outcome measures were standardized assessments of fatigue, pain and global functioning. Twenty-six adults who met criteria for CFS and had clinically significant executive functioning deficits were randomly assigned to a flexible morning dose (30, 50, 70 mg/day) of either placebo or LDX for a 6-week trial. The data were analyzed with standard analysis of variance (ANOVA) procedures. Participants in the LDX group showed significantly more positive change in BRIEF-A scores (Mchange=21.38, SD=15.85) than those in the placebo group (Mchange=3.36, SD=7.26). Participants in the active group also reported significantly less fatigue and generalized pain relative to the placebo group. Although future studies with LDX should examine whether these benefits generalize to larger, more diverse samples of patients, these results suggest that LDX could be a safe and efficacious treatment for the executive functioning deficits often associated with CFS. The possibility that dopaminergic medications could play an important role addressing the symptoms of CFS is also discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.psychres.2012.09.007

Cites

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?

  • In a recent double-blind, placebo-controlled study of 26 patients, Young showed an improvement in both fatigue and executive function in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome.

    “In a recent double-blind, placebo-controlled study of 26 patients, Young46 showed an improvement in both fatigue and executive function in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome.”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Young, J. L.
Affiliations
Wayne State University (US)
Corresponding author
Young, Joel L.
Venue
Psychiatry Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-05
Volume
207
Issue
1-2
Pages
127-133
ISSN
0165-1781 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1993711350
Cited by
23
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2
FWCI
1.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychiatry Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Long-Term Effects of COVID-19
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Coenzyme Q10 studies and effects
Keywords
lisdexamfetamine dimesylate, chronic fatigue syndrome, executive dysfunction, stimulant medication, BRIEF-A, fatigue, pain, dopaminergic therapy, drug efficacy
MeSH terms
Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate, Adult, Analysis of Variance, Cognition Disorders, Dextroamphetamine, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Double-Blind Method, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Time Factors, Antipsychotic Agents, Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic, Treatment Outcome, Young Adult, Executive Function

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