Analog Classroom Assessment of a Once-Daily Mixed Amphetamine Formulation, SLI381 (ADDERALL XR), in Children With ADHD
Open accessAbstract
Objectives This investigation was conducted primarily to assess the safety and efficacy of SLI381 (Adderall XR), developed as a once-daily treatment for children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Secondary objectives included examination of the time course, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic properties of SLI381.Method This was a randomized, double-blind, crossover study of three doses of SLI381 (10, 20, and 30 mg), placebo, and an active control (Adderall 10 mg) given once daily to 51 children with ADHD. Weekly assessments in an analog classroom setting included blind ratings of attention and deportment and a performance measure (math test) obtained every 1.5 hours over a 12-hour period.Results SLI381 was well tolerated. All active treatment conditions displayed significant time course effects and were superior to placebo in improving efficacy measures. Dose-dependent improvements were evident for SLI381. SLI381 20 and 30 mg and Adderall all showed rapid improvements by 1.5 hours, but only the SLI381 20- and 30-mg doses showed continued activity at 10.5 and 12 hours for classroom behavior and math test performance versus placebo.Conclusions These data provide support for the benefit of this novel, once-daily amphetamine preparation in the treatment of ADHD. The longer duration of action of SLI381 has the potential to simplify psychostimulant dosing, thus reducing dose diversion and eliminating the need for in-school administration. SLI381 appears to be a useful treatment option for many children with ADHD.
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
In a randomized, double-blind, crossover analog classroom study of 51 children with ADHD, once-daily SLI381 (Adderall XR) 10, 20, and 30 mg improved behavior and math performance versus placebo across up to 12 hours, with dose-dependent effects. SLI381 20 and 30 mg showed significant benefits at most postdose time points through 12 hours, and the drug was generally well tolerated.
Key findings
- The overall mixed-model ANOVA for the intent-to-treat population (N = 49) showed highly significant effects of treatment, period, session, and treatment-by-session interaction on all four primary efficacy variables: SKAMP Attention and Deportment and PERMP math problems attempted and correct; the treatment-by-session interaction was p < .0001.
- SLI381 30 mg showed significant improvement (p < .01) over placebo at all postdose time points. SLI381 20 mg was significant (p < .01) at all other postdose time points except Attention at 1.5 hours (p = .0513) and Deportment at 12 hours (p = .0531). SLI381 10 mg significantly reduced Attention problems at 4.5, 6.0, 7.5, and 10.5 hours and Deportment problems from 4.5 to 9.0 hours. Adderall 10 mg significantly decreased Attention problems from 1.5 to 7.5 hours and Deportment problems from 1.5 to 10.5 hours.
- On math measures, SLI381 20 and 30 mg produced statistically significant increases in problems attempted and solved at all postdose time points through 12 hours; SLI381 10 mg was significant from 4.5 to 10.5 hours. At 12 hours, children in the SLI381 20- and 30-mg groups correctly completed 34% and 43% more math problems than placebo children, respectively.
- Placebo subjects deteriorated across the day: by 10.5 hours postdose they attempted 35% fewer math problems and correctly answered 43% less than at the first assessment; at 12 hours they attempted 17% fewer and were correct on 25% fewer. No serious side effects were reported or observed, and 96% of patients were compliant with study treatment.
Methods
- Fifty-one children aged 6 to 12 years with DSM-IV ADHD (combined or hyperactive-impulsive subtype) were enrolled at four academic sites after a 1-week washout. After an open-label 20-mg SLI381 practice day, 49 children were randomized in a double-blind, crossover design to five treatment weeks: SLI381 10, 20, and 30 mg, Adderall 10 mg, and placebo, each administered at 7:30 A.M.; a Latin square determined sequence, with a sixth makeup week.
- Analog classroom assessments occurred on 7 consecutive Saturdays. Classroom periods lasted 45 minutes and were scheduled at 1.5, 4.5, 6.0, 7.5, 9.0, 10.5, and 12.0 hours postdose (no 3.0-hour period). Primary measures were the SKAMP Attention and Deportment ratings and the PERMP 10-minute math test scored for problems attempted and correct; secondary measures included parent and teacher side-effect ratings.
- Analyses used mixed-effects ANOVA with fixed effects of treatment, period, session, and treatment-by-session interaction; when the interaction was significant (p < .05), pairwise comparisons of individual treatments versus placebo were performed. All p values were two-tailed.
Limitations
- Paper-stated: the analog classroom is a unique setting that may influence behavior; only ADHD subjects were included, with no normal control subjects; staffing level may have influenced behavior; the classroom performance variable is restricted in reflecting overall academic performance; additional measures such as actigraph, peer assays, and global teacher ratings are needed; larger samples are needed to explore adverse-event differences; other age groups such as adolescents need study; and the fixed-dose design was not intended to determine optimal individual doses or minimal side effects.
- Evident from the text: pharmacokinetic results are not presented in this report and are deferred to a separate report; because no 3-hour postdose assessment was included, the exact onset of significant effect for SLI381 10 mg between 1.5 and 4.5 hours is unknown; the authors note a possible morning “rebound” effect but are cautious about concluding this; and direct comparative studies with methylphenidate are absent.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
0 of 31 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged
- Findingown data§ RESULTS
All active treatments were associated with robust increases in problems attempted and problems solved versus placebo.
“All active treatments were associated with robust increases in problems attempted and problems solved versus placebo.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingnone given§ RESULTS
Overall, study medications were well tolerated by the subjects.
“Overall, study medications were well tolerated by the subjects.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ DISCUSSION
Treatment effect sizes generated from each of the four primary efficacy variables average approximately 1.0 for the SLI381 30-mg condition at 6 hours postdose.
“Although this study was not designed to determine optimal doses for individual subjects, it is interesting to note that treatment effect sizes generated from each of the four primary efficacy variables average approximately 1.0 for the SLI381 30-mg condition at 6 hours postdose, suggesting excellent overall efficacy.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data§ RESULTS
SLI381 10 mg demonstrated significant increases from 4.5 to 10.5 hours versus placebo.
“SLI381 10 mg demonstrated significant increases from 4.5 to 10.5 hours versus placebo.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ RESULTS
Analysis of the math problem variables showed robust, apparently dose-dependent treatment effects versus placebo by session.
“Analysis of the math problem variables also showed robust, apparently dose-dependent treatment effects versus placebo by session (see Fig. 2, Tables 3 and 4).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
- Findingnone given§ RESULTS
No serious side effects were reported or observed.
“No serious side effects were reported or observed.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ RESULTS
SLI381 20- and 30-mg doses were associated with statistically significant increases in number attempted and number solved for all postdose time points through 12 hours.
“SLI381 20-and 30-mg doses were associated with statistically significant increases in number attempted and number solved for all postdose time points through 12 hours.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ RESULTS
The SLI381 30-mg dose showed significant improvement (p < .01) over placebo at all postdose time points.
“Applying pairwise mean comparisons between SLI381 and placebo (Table 3), the SLI381 30-mg dose showed significant improvement (p < .01)over placebo at all postdose time points.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ RESULTS
Increasing doses of SLI381 were associated with larger and consistent improvements (decreases in ratings of inattentive and disruptive behaviors) in SKAMP ratings.
“As evident in Fig. 1, increasing doses of SLI381 were associated with larger and consistent improvements (decreases in ratings of inattentive and disruptive behaviors) in SKAMP ratings.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ DISCUSSION
For the three SLI381 conditions, a consistent pattern of dose-dependent improvement and extension of time of improvement were observed.
“For the three SLI381 conditions, a consistent pattern of dose-dependent improvement and extension of time of improvement were observed.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ DISCUSSION
Each active treatment showed a unique time-action curve characterized by early improvements followed by varying degrees of symptom return or worsening performance.
“In contrast, each of the active treatments showed unique curves characterized by early improvements, followed by varying degrees of symptom return or worsening performance.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ DISCUSSION
The placebo data replicate the deterioration in classroom behavior and performance across most of the 12-hour period observed over a shorter timeframe by Swanson et al. (1998).
“Our placebo data replicate the deterioration in classroom behavior and performance across most of the 12-hour period, which was also observed over a shorter timeframe by Swanson et al. (1998).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Swanson et al. (1998) source
Not checked in the free run.
- Findingown data§ DISCUSSION
In this study, placebo-assigned children showed deteriorating classroom behavior and performance across the day, with only modest recovery at the final assessment session.
“In our study, subjects assigned to placebo demonstrated deteriorating behavior and classroom performance across the day, with only modest recovery at the final session of the assessment period (see Figs. 1 and 2).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ DISCUSSION
In this investigation, statistically significant differences were documented between SLI381 20 mg and 30 mg versus placebo on both behavioral and academic measures at 12 hours after administration.
“In our investigation, we have documented statistically significant differences between SLI381 20 mg and 30 mg versus placebo on both behavioral and academic measures at 12 hours after administration.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ DISCUSSION
The extended benefit of SLI381 20 mg and 30 mg on math measures is still apparent at 12.0 hours after administration, with children in these groups correctly completing 34% and 43% more math problems than placebo children, respectively.
“For example, the extended benefit of SLI381 20-and 30-mg conditions on math measures (shown in Fig. 2) is still apparent at 12.0 hours after administration, with children in the SLI381 groups correctly completing 34% and 43% more math problems over placebo children (20-and 30-mg SLI381 groups, respectively).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ DISCUSSION
The time course of each experimental treatment condition appeared to be unique by analysis of efficacy measures and by visual inspection of time-action curves.
“The time course of each experimental treatment condition appeared to be unique by analysis of efficacy measures and by visual inspection of time-action curves (Figs. 1 and 2).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data§ Clinical Implications
Initial data suggest that extending drug exposure over a 12-hour period sufficient to yield clinical improvement does not markedly increase reported side effects.
“Though limited to brief observations over a 6-week period, our initial data suggest that extending drug exposure over a 12-hour period sufficient to yield clinical improvement does not markedly increase reported side effects.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation§ Abstract
The short duration of action of available stimulants necessitates multiple daily doses for many children to provide effective symptom management.
“Specifically, the short duration of action of available stimulants necessitates multiple daily doses for many children to provide effective symptom management (Pelham et al., 1987;Swanson et al., 1978).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked - Premisecitation§ Abstract
A previous analog classroom pharmacodynamic study of Adderall documented behavioral effects up to approximately 5 to 7 hours postdose for the highest dose condition (5 to 20 mg).
“A previous analog classroom pharmacodynamic study of Adderall documented the time course of behavioral and classroom performance effects across a dose range of 5 to 20 mg given once, with behavioral effects evident up to approximately 5 to 7 hours postdose for the highest dose condition (Swanson et al., 1998).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Swanson et al., 1998 source
Not checked in the free run.
- Premisecitation§ Abstract
A 20-mg dose of SLI381 is bioequivalent to Adderall 10 mg b.i.d., with a 4-hour interval.
“A 20-mg dose of SLI381 is bioequivalent to Adderall 10 mg b.i.d., with a 4-hour interval (Michaels et al., 2001).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Michaels et al., 2001
Not checked in the free run.
- Premisecitation§ Abstract
There is a paucity of studies on the pharmacokinetic and behavioral time course of effects of low-dose amphetamine administration for ADHD.
“In spite of the frequency of use of amphetamine-containing products for the treatment of ADHD, there is a surprising paucity of studies on the pharmacokinetic (PK) and behavioral time course of effects of low-dose amphetamine administration for ADHD (Brown et al., 1979(Brown et al., , 1980;;Pelham et al., 1999;Swanson et al., 1998).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked - Study design and conductown data§ Data Analysis
No evidence for possible carryover effects was noted.
“As no evidence for possible carryover effects were noted (which would reduce drug-placebo or dose-dependent improvements), no secondary analyses for carryover effects were performed.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Study design and conductown data§ RESULTS
Nearly all patients (96%) were compliant with study treatment, defined as administration of 80% to 100% of prescribed study medication based on investigative site capsule counts.
“Nearly all patients (96%) were compliant with study treatment, defined as administration of 80% to 100% of prescribed study medication based on investigative site capsule counts.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Study design and conductown data§ RESULTS
Of 49 randomized subjects, 47 (92.2%) completed the 5 weeks of the double-blind portion of the study.
“Of the 49 randomized subjects, 47 (92.2%) completed the 5 weeks of the doubleblind portion of the study (all treatment conditions), with 2 subjects withdrawing (1 because of stomachache and 1 after developing an exclusion criterion).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationown data§ DISCUSSION
The continued efficacy of Adderall XR at later time points suggests that the delivery system may provide sufficient sustained benefit to enable once-daily administration for many children with ADHD.
“The continued efficacy of Adderall XR at later time points suggests that the delivery system may provide sufficient sustained benefit to enable once-daily administration for many children with ADHD.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: SLI381 is designed to release two pulses of active medication, modeling the PK profile of Adderall administered twice daily with doses approximately 4 hours apart.
- Premisecitation§ Dependent Measures
The SKAMP and PERMP measures have been shown to be sensitive to both dosage and time effects in prior stimulant research.
“These measures have been shown to be sensitive to both dosage and time effects in prior stimulant research (Swanson et al., 1998).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Swanson et al., 1998 source
Not checked in the free run.
- Interpretationown data§ DISCUSSION
The math test variables may in fact be most sensitive to drug efficacy in ADHD.
“Our data suggest that the math test variables may in fact be most sensitive to drug efficacy in ADHD.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationown data§ DISCUSSION
The pattern of dose-dependent improvements observed on all efficacy measures from low, medium, to high doses suggests that the SLI381 delivery system allows for predictable clinical effects during titration of medication.
“The pattern of dose-dependent improvements observed on all efficacy measures from low, medium, to high doses suggests that the SLI381 delivery system allows for predictable clinical effects during titration of medication.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: SLI381 is designed to release two pulses of active medication, modeling the PK profile of Adderall administered twice daily with doses approximately 4 hours apart.
- Interpretationnone given§ Clinical Implications
These data form the largest single direct observational study of the effects of an amphetamine-containing ADHD treatment.
“To our knowledge, these data form the largest single direct observational study of the effects of an amphetamine-containing ADHD treatment, and they add significantly to the literature that supports the therapeutic benefit of this agent for the treatment of ADHD in children.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Study design and conductnone given§ DISCUSSION
The study used direct observation methods to assess drug effect.
“The strengths of the study include the methods of direct observation used to assess drug effect”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning§ Clinical Implications
Without optimal dose assessments for individual subjects, it is difficult to make extensive comparisons to other efficacy studies that have used flexible-dose, individually titrated protocols.
“Without optimal dose assessments for individual subjects, it is difficult to make extensive comparisons to other efficacy studies that have used flexible-dose, individually titrated protocols.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Optimal dose levels for individual subjects vary considerably among individuals.
- Interpretationown data§ Clinical Implications
The detailed time course assessment confirms that Adderall XR possesses an extended pattern of clinical efficacy.
“However, the detailed time course assessment it does provide confirms that Adderall XR possesses an extended pattern of clinical efficacy.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationcitation§ DISCUSSION
The locomotor activity reductions observed by James et al. (2001) were of uncertain clinical significance because of lacking repeated assessments of behavior and academic function.
“but lacking repeated assessments of behavior and academic function, the observed locomotor activity reductions were of uncertain clinical significance.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites James et al. (2001) source
Not checked in the free run.
- Premisecitation§ DISCUSSION
James et al. (2001) showed statistically significant reductions in locomotor activity for up to 12 hours for some high-dose amphetamine preparations.
“James et al. (2001) showed statistically significant reductions in locomotor activity for up to 12 hours for some high-dose amphetamine preparations”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites James et al. (2001) source
Not checked in the free run.
- Interpretationreasoning§ Clinical Implications
These observations add to the excellent safety record of the psychostimulants.
“These observations add to the excellent safety record of the psychostimulants.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationown data§ Clinical Implications
Acknowledging striking interindividual differences in stimulant drug effect across children with ADHD for time of action and dosage, SLI381 appears to represent a promising new addition to the armamentarium of ADHD treatments.
“Acknowledging the striking interindividual differences in stimulant drug effect across children with ADHD, both for time of action and dosage, SLI381 appears to represent a promising new addition to the armamentarium of ADHD treatments.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Premisecitation§ Clinical Implications
One larger study of SLI381 with longer exposure appeared to confirm the observation of apparent excellent tolerability of SLI381.
“One larger study of SLI381 with longer exposure appeared to confirm our observation of apparent excellent tolerability of SLI381 (Biederman et al., 2002).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Biederman et al., 2002 source
Not checked in the free run.
- May combine two claims. 20
- Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 15
May combine two claims.
Findingown data§ RESULTSSLI381 10 mg demonstrated significant reductions in Attention problem ratings at 4.5, 6.0, 7.5, and 10.5 hours postdose, and Deportment problem ratings from 4.5 to 9.0 hours postdose.
“SLI381 10 mg demonstrated significant reductions in Attention problem ratings at 4.5, 6.0, 7.5, and 10.5 hours postdose, Deportment problem ratings from 4.5 to 9.0 hours postdose.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown data§ DISCUSSIONAnalyses of the effects of SLI381 20 mg and 30 mg showed both beneficial effects at the first postdose assessment (1.5 hours postdose) and maintenance of these improvements throughout 12 hours for the majority of assessments.
“Analyses of the effects of SLI381 20 mg (equivalent to 10 mg of Adderall b.i.d.) and 30 mg (equivalent to 15 mg of Adderall b.i.d.) showed both beneficial effects at the first postdose assessment (1.5 hours postdose) and maintenance of these improvements throughout 12 hours for the majority of assessments.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown data§ RESULTSAdderall 10 mg was associated with significant decreases in SKAMP ratings for Attention problems from 1.5 to 7.5 hours and for Deportment problems from 1.5 to 10.5 hours postdose.
“Adderall 10 mg was associated with significant decreases in SKAMP ratings for Attention problems from 1.5 to 7.5 hours and for Deportment problems from 1.5 to 10.5 hours postdose.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown data§ RESULTSSLI381 20 mg just missed attaining statistical significance for Attention problem ratings at 1.5 hours (p = .0513) and Deportment problem ratings at 12 hours (p = .0531), but ratings were significant (p < .01) at all other postdose time points.
“SLI381 20 mg just missed attaining statistical significance for Attention problem ratings at 1.5 hours (p = .0513)and Deportment problem ratings at 12 hours (p = .0531),but ratings were significant (p < .01)at all other postdose time points.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown data§ DISCUSSIONFor Adderall XR 10 mg, improvement in SKAMP Attention and Deportment ratings were observed by 4.5 hours postdose, and math problems attempted and correct were increased.
“For Adderall XR 10 mg, equivalent to 5 mg of Adderall administered b.i.d., improvement in SKAMP Attention and Deportment ratings (as decreases in attention and behavior problems) were observed by 4.5 hours postdose, and math problems attempted and correct were increased.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown data§ RESULTSAdderall 10 mg demonstrated increases versus placebo at 1.5, 6.0, 7.5, and 9.0 hours postdose for number attempted; for number solved significance was found at the 1.5, 4.5, 6.0, and 9.0 time points.
“Adderall 10 mg was found to demonstrate increases versus placebo at 1.5, 6.0, 7.5, and 9.0 hours postdose for number attempted; for number solved significance was found at the 1.5, 4.5, 6.0, and 9.0 time points.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown data§ DISCUSSIONAt the 12-hour session, placebo children attempted 17% fewer math problems and were correct on 25% fewer than at the initial assessment.
“At the 12-hour session, placebo children attempted 17% fewer math problems and were correct on 25% fewer than at the initial assessment.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown data§ DISCUSSIONBy 10.5 hours postdose, placebo subjects were attempting 35% fewer math problems and correctly answering 43% less than at the first assessment session.
“By 10.5 hours postdose, subjects on placebo were attempting 35% fewer math problems and were correctly answering 43% less than at the first assessment session.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Study design and conductown data§ Study DesignThe study design was randomized, double-blind, crossover, placebo- and active-controlled.
“The study design which followed the first study day was randomized, double-blind, crossover, placebo-and active-controlled.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisecitation§ AbstractSwanson et al. (1998) demonstrated a pattern of deterioration on placebo in performance across morning into afternoon assessments.
“It is interesting that the Swanson et al. (1998) report also demonstrated the pattern of deterioration on placebo in performance across morning into afternoon assessments, highlighting the importance of providing appropriate control groups for time-response studies.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Swanson et al., 1998 source
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductcitation§ Analog Classroom ProtocolThe schedule and procedures for the analog classroom days were based on a modification of well-validated procedures used in previous time-response stimulant studies.
“The schedule and procedures for the analog classroom days were based on a modification of well-validated procedures used in previous timeresponse stimulant studies (Pelham et al., 1995;Swanson et al., 1978Swanson et al., , 1998Swanson et al., , 2000)).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checkedMay combine two claims.
Premisecitation§ AbstractJames et al. (2001) described locomotor activity effects of amphetamine preparations up to 12 hours postdose but did not repeatedly probe disruptive behavior or academic performance.
“James et al. (2001) recently described locomotor activity effects of amphetamine preparations up to 12 hours postdose, but they did not repeatedly probe disruptive behavior or academic performance.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites James et al., 2001 source
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Study design and conductown data§ Study DesignA Latin square design was used to determine the randomization sequence, with approximately one fifth of the sample randomized to each of five treatment sequences.
“A Latin square design was used to determine the randomization sequence for individual subjects for the first 5 weeks with approximately one fifth of the sample randomized to each of five treatment sequences.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductcitation§ Analog Classroom ProtocolEach classroom contained two observers who simultaneously rated behaviors using a behavioral observation system described previously.
“In addition, each classroom contained two observers who simultaneously rated the behaviors of one half of the study group, using a behavioral observation system described previously (Swanson et al., 1998(Swanson et al., , 2000)).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Swanson et al., 1998 source
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Swanson et al., 2000
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisecitation§ AbstractPelham et al. (1999) found apparent benefits of Adderall up to 7 hours after administration in a summer treatment program.
“Pelham et al. (1999) studied Adderall effects in a summer treatment program and found apparent benefits up to 7 hours after administration.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Pelham et al., 1999 source
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductnone given§ Pharmacokinetic SamplingConcentrations of d- and l-amphetamine were assayed using validated liquid chromatography-mass spectroscopy methodology at a central laboratory.
“Concentrations of d-and l-amphetamine were assayed using validated liquid chromatography-mass spectroscopy methodology at a central laboratory.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
Study design and conductreasoning§ Analog Classroom ProtocolTo avoid confounding observation of medication effects, no behavioral or other treatment approaches were used during the analog classroom days.
“To avoid confounding observation of medication effects, no behavioral or other treatment approaches were used during the analog classroom days.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Premisecitation§ Dependent MeasuresTest-retest reliability and concurrent validity of the SKAMP are high.
“Test-retest reliability and concurrent validity of the SKAMP are high (Wigal et al., 1998).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Wigal et al., 1998
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductreasoning§ DISCUSSIONBecause the study protocol did not include a 3-hour postdose assessment, it is not known exactly at what point between 1.5 and 4.5 hours the SLI381 10-mg dose may have attained statistical significance versus placebo.
“Because the study protocol did not include a 3-hour postdose assessment, it is not known exactly at what point between 1.5 and 4.5 hours the SLI381 10-mg dose may have attained statistical significance versus placebo.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductnone given§ Analog Classroom ProtocolAll classroom raters had completed reliability training for behavioral assessments.
“All classroom raters had completed reliability training for behavioral assessments.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationown data§ DISCUSSIONAdderall XR showed excellent efficacy and tolerability and displayed a time course of action that extended beyond that of immediate-release Adderall at the 10-mg q.d. dose used as a positive control, and by comparison to prior reports of the pharmacodynamic time course for Adderall as assessed by similar measures, even for doses as high as 20 mg q.a.m.
“Overall, Adderall XR showed excellent efficacy and tolerability and displayed a time course of action that extended beyond that of immediate-release Adderall at the 10-mg q.d.dose used as a positive control in this study, and by comparison to prior reports of the pharmacodynamic time course for Adderall as assessed by similar measures (Swanson et al., 1998), even for doses as high as 20 mg q.a.m.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Swanson et al., 1998 source
Not checked in the free run.
- Rests on an assumption: SLI381 is designed to release two pulses of active medication, modeling the PK profile of Adderall administered twice daily with doses approximately 4 hours apart.
- Rests on an assumption: The classroom and play settings in the analog classroom are generally comparable to those regularly experienced by the children in school.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Interpretationnone given§ LimitationsThe classroom performance variable is restricted in its ability to reflect any child's overall academic performance across multiple subjects, demands, and tasks.
“In addition, the classroom performance variable is restricted in its ability to reflect any child's overall academic performance across multiple subjects, demands, and tasks.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductreasoning§ Clinical ImplicationsAs a fixed-dose study, it was not intended to achieve minimal side effects.
“As a fixed-dose study, it also was not intended to achieve minimal side effects.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
Study design and conductreasoning§ Clinical ImplicationsThe study was not designed to ascertain optimal dose levels for individual subjects.
“The study was not designed to ascertain optimal dose levels for individual subjects, which are well known to vary considerably among individuals.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationcitation§ Clinical ImplicationsOur data suggest that new drug delivery systems such as SLI381 (Adderall XR) represent a successful strategy to extend the benefits of psychostimulant treatment of ADHD without incurring added side effects, thereby avoiding some compliance issues raised by shorter-acting stimulant preparations.
“Our data suggest new drug delivery systems such as SLI381 (Adderall XR) represent a successful strategy to extend the benefits of psychostimulant treatment of ADHD without incurring added side effects, thereby avoiding some of the compliance issues raised by shorter-acting stimulant preparations (Brown et al., 1987;Firestone, 1982;Kauffman et al., 1981).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checkedMay combine two claims.
Study design and conductcitation§ DISCUSSIONThe study used techniques for behavior and performance assay which have been described in prior ADHD treatment research with extensive training used across the four research sites in the reliable implementation of use of analog classroom procedures.
“use of techniques for behavior and performance assay which have been described in prior ADHD treatment research (Swanson et al., 2000) with extensive training used across the four research sites in the reliable implementation of use of analog classroom procedures.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Swanson et al., 2000
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Interpretationcitation§ LimitationsThe analog classroom, although attempting to mimic a regular school classroom, represents a unique setting that may influence behavior.
“Although the analog classroom attempts to mimic many aspects of a regular school classroom, it admittedly represents a unique setting that may influence behavior (Barkley, 1991).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Barkley, 1991 source
Not checked in the free run.
May combine two claims.
Interpretationown data§ DISCUSSIONThe 12-hour differences correspond to dimensionless effect sizes of approximately 0.3 to 0.5 and represent at least suggestive evidence of clinically significant remaining treatment benefit from SLI381 for ADHD as long as 12 hours after administration.
“As these differences calculate to dimensionless effect sizes of between approximately 0.3 and 0.5, we would argue that they represent at least suggestive evidence of “clinically significant” (Kraemer, 1992) remaining treatment benefit from this extended-release preparation for ADHD as long as 12 hours after administration.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Kraemer, 1992 source
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Premisecitation§ Clinical ImplicationsArnold (2000), Swanson et al. (1998), and others (Elia et al., 1991) have stated that head-to-head comparisons of amphetamine agents versus methylphenidate suggest nearly equivalent group effects, although Arnold (2000) has raised the question of differential benefits in some symptom domains.
“Arnold (2000), Swanson et al. (1998), and others (Elia et al., 1991) have stated that head-to-head comparisons of amphetamine agents versus methylphenidate suggest nearly equivalent group effects, although Arnold (2000) has raised the question of differential benefits in some symptom domains.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checkedProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductnone given§ LimitationsThe level of staffing may have influenced behavior.
“Furthermore, the level of staffing may have influenced behavior, although mean behavior problem ratings on the SKAMP were clearly elevated during the placebo condition, and treatment effects were robust.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationnone given§ LimitationsThe analog assessments included only ADHD subjects; no control or normal subjects were available for comparison.
“The analog assessments included only ADHD subjects; no control or normal subjects were available for comparison.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationown data§ Clinical ImplicationsSLI381 has the potential to work throughout the day and into the early evening after a single morning administration, thus avoiding in-school administration for children who need extended therapy.
“It has the potential to work throughout the day and into the early evening after a single morning administration, thus avoiding in-school administration for those children who need extended therapy.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationown data§ Clinical ImplicationsThese data demonstrate clear and compelling therapeutic effects of stimulants by documenting improvements in both classroom behavioral and performance measures.
“Furthermore, these data demonstrate the clear and compelling therapeutic effects of stimulants, by documenting improvements in both classroom behavioral and performance measures.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
The paper relies on this without support.
SLI381 is designed to release two pulses of active medication, modeling the PK profile of Adderall administered twice daily with doses approximately 4 hours apart.
“SLI381 is designed to release two pulses of active medication, modeling the PK profile of Adderall administered twice daily with doses administered approximately 4 hours apart.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Clinically, children with ADHD often experience difficulty with evening homework requirements and less structured family routines, requiring additional medication later in the day.
“Clinically, children with ADHD often experience difficulty with evening homework requirements and less structured family routines, requiring additional medication later in the day.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The complexity of multiple daily dosing schedules contributes to reduced compliance and may increase the likelihood of drug diversion.
“The complexity of multiple daily dosing schedules contributes to reduced compliance and may increase the likelihood of drug diversion.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The classroom and play settings in the analog classroom are generally comparable to those regularly experienced by the children in school.
“the general comparability of classroom and play settings to those regularly experienced by the children in school”
The paper relies on this without support.
The sample size was larger than in prior analog classroom studies.
“a larger sample size than in prior analog classroom studies”
The paper relies on this without support.
Few studies have systematically assessed the time-action effects of psychostimulants for as long as 12 hours postdose.
“Few studies have attempted to assess systematically the time-action effects of any psychostimulant for effects as prolonged as 12 hours postdose.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Optimal dose levels for individual subjects vary considerably among individuals.
“which are well known to vary considerably among individuals”
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?
The higher (worse) predose SKAMP deportment and attention ratings in the LDX group compared with placebo may be in part related to residual drug from the previous treatment day.
“While there may be multiple factors that contributed to the higher ratings, the group differences may be, in part, related to residual drug from the previous treatment day as has been seen in another study with an amphetamine-based long-acting stimulant [32].”
From A 13-hour laboratory school study of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in school-aged children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (2009) · cites this paper as [32]
The Discussion (page unavailable) reports higher behavior-problem ratings at the first assessment in the active-treatment groups, supporting the citation as an example of a similar predose pattern with an amphetamine-based stimulant. It cautiously suggests a possible morning rebound effect, but does not attribute the ratings to residual drug from the previous treatment day. The study examined SLI381 (Adderall XR), not LDX. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredEfficacy of long-acting stimulants in the laboratory school setting has been demonstrated for children with ADHD across the day and at 12 and 13 hours postdose.
“While similar studies in adults are limited, efficacy of long-acting stimulants in the laboratory school setting has been demonstrated for children with ADHD across the day and at 12 [15,22,25,33,34] and 13 hours postdose [16].”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Table 1 calls all 51 children the randomized sample
MinorTable 1 labels its 51-patient group the randomized sample, whereas the Results state that only 49 children were randomized.
“TABLE 1 Demographic and Baseline Characteristics of Randomized Sample | Characteristic | All Patients (N = 51) |”
“Forty-nine children were randomized for the crossover treatment portion of the study.”
Completion percentage uses the wrong denominator
MinorThe sentence identifies 49 randomized subjects, but 47 of 49 is 95.9%, not 92.2%. The reported percentage instead uses all 51 enrolled children as its denominator.
Reported 92.2 · recomputed 95.918367
“Of the 49 randomized subjects, 47 (92.2%) completed the 5 weeks of the doubleblind portion of the study”
Cites
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: A Handbook for Diagnosis and Treatment
Barkley, R. A., & Poillion, M. J. (1994) · Behavioral Disorders · doi:10.1177/019874299401900205 · Cited by 4,632 · see citing works
SHAFFER, D., FISHER, P., LUCAS, C. P., DULCAN, M. K., & SCHWAB-STONE, M. E. (2000) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/00004583-200001000-00014 · Cited by 3,505 · see citing works
(1999) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.56.12.1073 · Cited by 3,372 · see citing works
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. A Handbook for Diagnosis and Treatment
Silver, L. B. (1991) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/00004583-199107000-00040 · Cited by 1,395 · see citing works
Pharmacotherapy of Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder across the Life Cycle
SPENCER, T., BIEDERMAN, J., WILENS, T., HARDING, M., O'DONNELL, D., & GRIFFIN, S. (1996) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/00004583-199604000-00008 · Cited by 830 · see citing works
Self-citationAttention-Deficit, S. O., & Disorder, H. (2001) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.108.4.1033 · Cited by 636 · see citing works
The ecological validity of laboratory and analogue assessment methods of ADHD symptoms
Barkley, R. A. (1991) · Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology · doi:10.1007/bf00909976 · Cited by 419 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Although the analog classroom attempts to mimic many aspects of a regular school classroom, it admittedly represents a unique setting that may influence behavior (Barkley, 1991).”
BackgroundMethylphenidate 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 · see citing works
Pelham, W. E., Greenslade, K. E., Vodde‐Hamilton, M., Murphy, D. A., Greenstein, J. J., Gnagy, E. M., Guthrie, K. J., Hoover, M. D., & Dahl, R. E. (1990) · PEDIATRICS · doi:10.1542/peds.86.2.226 · Cited by 249 · see citing works
Analog Classroom Assessment of Adderall® in Children With ADHD
SWANSON, J. M., WIGAL, S., GREENHILL, L. L., BROWNE, R., WASLIK, B., LERNER, M., WILLIAMS, L., FLYNN, D., AGLER, D., CROWLEY, K., et al. (1998) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/00004583-199805000-00014 · Cited by 218 · see citing works
Self-citationSwanson, J., Kinsbourne, M., Roberts, W., & Zucker, K. (1978) · PEDIATRICS · doi:10.1542/peds.61.1.21 · Cited by 205 · see citing works
Self-citationEvans, S. W., Pelham, W. E., Smith, B. H., Bukstein, O., Gnagy, E. M., Greiner, A. R., Altenderfer, L., & Baron-Myak, C. (2001) · Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1037//1064-1297.9.2.163 · Cited by 185 · see citing works
Biederman, J., Lopez, F. A., Boellner, S. W., & Chandler, M. C. (2002) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.110.2.258 · Cited by 180 · see citing works
Self-citationPelham, W. E., Sturges, J., Hoza, J., Schmidt, C., Bijlsma, J. J., Milich, R., & Moorer, S. (1987) · PEDIATRICS · doi:10.1542/peds.80.4.491 · Cited by 167 · see citing works
The use of the DSM-III-R Checklist for initial diagnostic assessments
Hudziak, J. J., Helzer, J. E., Wetzel, M. W., Kessel, K. B., McGee, B. L., Janča, A., & Przybeck, T. R. (1993) · Comprehensive Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/0010-440x(93)90061-8 · Cited by 164 · see citing works
BENZEDRINE® AND DEXEDRINE® IN THE TREATMENT OF CHILDREN'S BEHAVIOR DISORDERS
Bradley, C. (1950) · PEDIATRICS · doi:10.1542/peds.5.1.24 · Cited by 157 · see citing works
Pliszka, S. R., GREENHILL, L. L., Crismon, M. L., Sedillo, A., Carlson, C. L., Conners, C. K., McCracken, J. T., Swanson, J. M., Hughes, C. W., LLANA, M. E., et al. (2000) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/00004583-200007000-00021 · Cited by 152 · see citing works
Self-citationEvans, S. W., Pelham, W. E., Smith, B. H., et al. (2001) · Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1037/1064-1297.9.2.163 · Cited by 146 · see citing works
Factors associated with children's adherence to stimulant medication
Firestone, P. (1982) · American Journal of Orthopsychiatry · doi:10.1111/j.1939-0025.1982.tb01431.x · Cited by 143 · see citing works
Pelham, W. E., Gnagy, E. M., Chronis, A. M., Burrows-MacLean, L., Fabiano, G. A., Onyango, A. N., Meichenbaum, D. L., Williams, A., Aronoff, H. R., & Steiner, R. L. (1999) · PEDIATRICS · doi:10.1542/peds.104.6.1300 · Cited by 138 · see citing works
(1998) · PubMed · Cited by 130 · see citing works
Voeller, K. K. S. (2000) · Pediatric Neurology · doi:10.1016/s0887-8994(00)00149-1 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
Arnold, L. E. (1978) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1978.01770280073008 · Cited by 104 · see citing works
Plasma levels of d-amphetamine in hyperactive children: Serial behavior and motor responses
Brown, G. L., Hunt, R. D., Ebert, M. H., Bunney, W. E., & Kopin, I. J. (1979) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/bf00427126 · Cited by 97 · see citing works
Ck, C. (1972) · PubMed · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of Single-Dose Amphetamine Formulations in ADHD
JAMES, R. S., SHARP, W. S., BASTAIN, T. M., LEE, P. P., WALTER, J. M., CZARNOLEWSKI, M., & CASTELLANOS, F. X. (2001) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/00004583-200111000-00006 · Cited by 92 · see citing works
Compliance with pharmacological and cognitive treatments for attention deficit disorder
BROWN, R. T., BORDEN, K. A., WYNNE, M. E., SPUNT, A. L., & CLINGERMAN, S. R. (1987) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/00004583-198707000-00010 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
PELHAM, W. E., SWANSON, J. M., FURMAN, M. B., & SCHWINDT, H. (1995) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/00004583-199511000-00018 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
Self-citationWeiss, G., MINDE, K. K., Douglas, V. I., WERRY, J. S., & Sykes, D. H. (1971) · PubMed Central · Cited by 75 · see citing works
Greenhill, L. L., & Osman, B. B. (2000) · Cited by 71 · see citing works
Self-citationKraemer, H. C. (1992) · Psychoneuroendocrinology · doi:10.1016/0306-4530(92)90013-w · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Psychological Effects of Stimulant Drugs in Children with Minimal Brain Dysfunction.
Conners, C. K. (1972) · PEDIATRICS · Cited by 61 · see citing works
Brown, G. L., Ebert, M. H., Mikkelsen, E. J., & Hunt, R. D. (1980) · Journal of the American Academy of Child Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/s0002-7138(09)60699-3 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
Medication compliance in hyperactive children
Kauffman, R. E., Smith-Wright, D. L., Reese, C. A., Simpson, R. L., & Jones, F. (1982) · Patient Counselling and Health Education · doi:10.1016/s0738-3991(82)80037-2 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Arnold, 2000, Methylphenidate versus amphetamine: a comparative review, 127
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Pliszka, S. (2007) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/chi.0b013e318054e724 · Cited by 1,765 · see citing works
Swanson, J. M., Kinsbourne, M., Nigg, J., Lanphear, B., Stefanatos, G. A., Volkow, N., Taylor, E., Casey, B. J., Castellanos, F. X., & Wadhwa, P. D. (2007) · Neuropsychology Review · doi:10.1007/s11065-007-9019-9 · Cited by 580 · see citing works
Self-citationPLISZKA, S. R., CRISMON, M. L., HUGHES, C. W., CORNERS, C. K., EMSLIE, G. J., JENSEN, P. S., McCRACKEN, J. T., SWANSON, J. M., & LOPEZ, M. (2006) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/01.chi.0000215326.51175.eb · Cited by 442 · see citing works
Self-citationBiederman, J., Boellner, S. W., Childress, A., Lopez, F. A., Krishnan, S., & Zhang, Y. (2007) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2007.04.015 · Cited by 356 · see citing works
Self-citationEffects of Stimulant Medication on Growth Rates Across 3 Years in the MTA Follow-up
SWANSON, J. M., ELLIOTT, G. R., GREENHILL, L. L., WIGAL, T., ARNOLD, L. E., VITIELLO, B., HECHTMAN, L., EPSTEIN, J. N., PELHAM, W. E., ABIKOFF, H. B., et al. (2007) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/chi.0b013e3180686d7e · Cited by 323 · see citing works
Self-citationADHD Treatments, Sleep, and Sleep Problems: Complex Associations
Stein, M. A., Weiss, M., & Hlavaty, L. (2012) · Neurotherapeutics · doi:10.1007/s13311-012-0130-0 · Cited by 165 · see citing works
Weisler, R. H., Biederman, J., Spencer, T. J., Wilens, T. E., Faraone, S. V., Chrisman, A. K., Read, S. C., & Tulloch, S. J. (2006) · CNS Spectrums · doi:10.1017/s1092852900013687 · Cited by 158 · see citing works
Self-citationWigal, T., Brams, M., Gasior, M., Gao, J., Squires, L., Giblin, J., & 316 Study Group (2010) · Behavioral and Brain Functions · doi:10.1186/1744-9081-6-34 · Cited by 136 · see citing works
“The use of the LSP, and specifically the PERMP assessment, has been applied widely to evaluate the effects of long-acting stimulants for children with ADHD [15,22-26].”
BackgroundMethodthe 311 Study Group, Wigal, S. B., Kollins, S. H., Childress, A. C., & Squires, L. (2009) · Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health · doi:10.1186/1753-2000-3-17 · Cited by 112 · see citing works
Self-citationCohen, S. C., Mulqueen, J. M., Ferracioli-Oda, E., Stuckelman, Z. D., Coughlin, C. G., Leckman, J. F., & Bloch, M. H. (2015) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2015.06.011 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
McGough, J. J., Wigal, S. B., Abikoff, H., Turnbow, J. M., Posner, K., & Moon, E. (2006) · Journal of Attention Disorders · doi:10.1177/1087054705284089 · Cited by 103 · see citing works
Self-citationCoughlin, C. G., Cohen, S. C., Mulqueen, J. M., Ferracioli-Oda, E., Stuckelman, Z. D., & Bloch, M. H. (2015) · Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1089/cap.2015.0075 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
Psychopharmacology: concepts and opinions about the use of stimulant medications
Swanson, J. M., & Volkow, N. D. (2009) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2008.02062.x · Cited by 78 · see citing works
Self-citationPozzi, M., Carnovale, C., Peeters, G. G. A. M., Gentili, M., Antoniazzi, S., Radice, S., Clementi, E., & Nobile, M. (2018) · Journal of Affective Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2018.05.021 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Silva, R. R., Muniz, R., Pestreich, L., Childress, A., Brams, M., Lopez, F. A., & Wang, J. (2006) · Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1089/cap.2006.16.239 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
López, F. A., & Leroux, J. R. (2013) · ADHD Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorders · doi:10.1007/s12402-013-0106-x · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Changes in Emotions Related to Medication Used to Treat ADHD. Part I: Literature Review
Manos, M. J., Brams, M., Childress, A. C., Findling, R. L., López, F. A., & Jensen, P. S. (2011) · Journal of Attention Disorders · doi:10.1177/1087054710381230 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Wigal, S. B., Kollins, S. H., Childress, A. C., & Adeyi, B. (2010) · Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health · doi:10.1186/1753-2000-4-32 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- MCCRACKEN, J. T., BIEDERMAN, J., GREENHILL, L. L., SWANSON, J. M., MCGOUGH, J. J., SPENCER, T. J., POSNER, K., WIGAL, S., PATAKI, C., ZHANG, Y., & TULLOCH, S.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- Corresponding author
- MCCRACKEN, JAMES T.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2003-06
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 673-683
- ISSN
- 0890-8567 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2052824975
- Cited by
- 116
- References
- 34
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 7.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pharmaceutical studies and practices
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Pharmacology and Obesity Treatment
- Keywords
- Adderall XR, amphetamine, once-daily formulation, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, children, duration of action, dose dependence, classroom behavior, mathematics achievement, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics
- MeSH terms
- Amphetamines, Central Nervous System Stimulants, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Child, Delayed-Action Preparations, Double-Blind Method, Drug Administration Schedule, Female, Humans, Male, Schools, Time, Cross-Over Studies
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.
Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-10.
Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-10.
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