Cited by 160Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderSchizophrenia research and treatmentDevelopmental and Educational Neuropsychology

Improvements in Executive Function Correlate with Enhanced Performance and Functioning and Health-Related Quality of Life: Evidence from 2 Large, Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trials in ADHD

Brown, Thomas E., Landgraf, Jeanne M.·2010·Postgraduate Medicine

Abstract

Objective To assess whether improvement in executive function correlates with perceived improvement in health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) who are treated with stimulant medication. Methods We collected data on executive function and HRQOL using the Brown Attention-Deficit Disorder Scale (BADDS) and the ADHD Impact Module-Adult (AIM-A) during 2 large, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials evaluating the use of the triple-bead mixed amphetamine salt (MAS) SPD465 as stimulant pharmacotherapy for ADHD. BADDS and AIM-A data were collected at baseline and at study endpoint, and changes from baseline were assessed. Correlation coefficients for BADDS and AIM-A were calculated at baseline and endpoint for each study. Results The change from baseline in BADDS total score was -14.8 ± 24.49 in Study 1 (dose optimization strategy) and -26.1 ± 28.54 in Study 2 (forced-dose titration strategy), demonstrating substantial reported improvement in executive function. In both studies, improvement was reported for all 5 BADDS clusters at study endpoint versus baseline. While improvement was reported for all 6 AIM-A scales at study endpoint versus baseline, the most substantial change from baseline in AIM-A scores over the course of the studies was in Performance and Function (Study 1, +15.2 ± 25.68; Study 2, +26.3 ± 28.17). There was significant correlation of the BADDS total score with the AIM-A Performance and Func…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3810/pgm.2010.09.2200

Cites

4 of 4 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
Brown, T. E., & Landgraf, J. M.
Affiliations
  • Yale University (US)
  • HealthActCHQ, Inc., Cambridge, MA
Corresponding author
Brown, Thomas E.
Venue
Postgraduate Medicine
Published
2010-09-01
Volume
122
Issue
5
Pages
42-51
ISSN
  • 0032-5481 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-9260
OpenAlex
W2043954566
Cited by
160
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 5
FWCI
2.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Postgraduate Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
Keywords
executive function, health-related quality of life, adult ADHD, stimulant medication, dose titration
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Amphetamines, Central Nervous System Stimulants, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Delayed-Action Preparations, Dextroamphetamine, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Double-Blind Method, Humans, Middle Aged, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Quality of Life, 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