SummaryBackgroundThe benefits and safety of medications for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) remain controversial, and guidelines are inconsistent on which medications are preferred across different age groups. We aimed to estimate the comparative efficacy and tolerability of oral medications for ADHD in children, adolescents, and adults.MethodsWe did a literature search for published and unpublished double-blind randomised controlled trials comparing amphetamines (including lisdexamfetamine), atomoxetine, bupropion, clonidine, guanfacine, methylphenidate, and modafinil with each other or placebo. We systematically contacted study authors and drug manufacturers for additional information. Primary outcomes were efficacy (change in severity of ADHD core symptoms based on teachers' and clinicians' ratings) and tolerability (proportion of patients who dropped out of studies because of side-effects) at timepoints closest to 12 weeks, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks. We estimated summary odds ratios (ORs) and standardised mean differences (SMDs) using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects. We assessed the risk of bias of individual studies with the Cochrane risk of bias tool and confidence of estimates with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach for network meta-analyses. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42014008976.Findings133 double-blind randomised controlled trials (81 in children and adolescents, 51 in adults, and one in both) were included. The analysis of efficacy closest to 12 weeks was based on 10 068 children and adolescents and 8131 adults; the analysis of tolerability was based on 11 018 children and adolescents and 5362 adults. The confidence of estimates varied from high or moderate (for some comparisons) to low or very low (for most indirect comparisons). For ADHD core symptoms rated by clinicians in children and adolescents closest to 12 weeks, all included drugs were superior to placebo (eg, SMD −1·02, 95% CI −1·19 to −0·85 for amphetamines, −0·78, −0·93 to −0·62 for methylphenidate, −0·56, −0·66 to −0·45 for atomoxetine). By contrast, for available comparisons based on teachers' ratings, only methylphenidate (SMD −0·82, 95% CI −1·16 to −0·48) and modafinil (−0·76, −1·15 to −0·37) were more efficacious than placebo. In adults (clinicians' ratings), amphetamines (SMD −0·79, 95% CI −0·99 to −0·58), methylphenidate (−0·49, −0·64 to −0·35), bupropion (−0·46, −0·85 to −0·07), and atomoxetine (−0·45, −0·58 to −0·32), but not modafinil (0·16, −0·28 to 0·59), were better than placebo. With respect to tolerability, amphetamines were inferior to placebo in both children and adolescents (odds ratio [OR] 2·30, 95% CI 1·36–3·89) and adults (3·26, 1·54–6·92); guanfacine was inferior to placebo in children and adolescents only (2·64, 1·20–5·81); and atomoxetine (2·33, 1·28–4·25), methylphenidate (2·39, 1·40–4·08), and modafinil (4·01, 1·42–11·33) were less well tolerated than placebo in adults only. In head-to-head comparisons, only diff...

While psychiatric comorbidities of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) have been extensively explored, less attention has been paid to somatic conditions possibly associated with this disorder. However, mounting evidence in the last decade pointed to a possible significant association between ADHD and certain somatic conditions, including obesity. This papers provides an update of a previous systematic review on the relationship between obesity and ADHD (Cortese and Vincenzi, Curr Top Behav Neurosci 9:199–218, 2012), focusing on pertinent peer-reviewed empirical papers published since 2012. We conducted a systematic search in PubMed, Ovid, and Web of Knowledge databases (search dates: from January 1st, 2012, to July 16th, 2016). We retained a total of 41 studies, providing information on the prevalence of obesity in individuals with ADHD, focusing on the rates of ADHD in individuals with obesity, or reporting data useful to gain insight into possible mechanisms underlying the putative association between ADHD and obesity. Overall, over the past 4 years, an increasing number of studies have assessed the prevalence of obesity in individuals with ADHD or the rates of ADHD in patients with obesity. Although findings are mixed across individual studies, meta-analytic evidence shows a significant association between ADHD and obesity, regardless of possible confounding factors such as psychiatric comorbidities. An increasing number of studies have also addressed possible mechanisms underlying the link between ADHD and obesity, highlighting the role, among others, of abnormal eating patterns, sedentary lifestyle, and possible common genetic alterations. Importantly, recent longitudinal studies support a causal role of ADHD in contributing to weight gain. The next generation of studies in the field should explore if and to which extent the treatment of comorbid ADHD in individuals with obesity may lead to long-term weight loss, ultimately improving their overall well-being and quality of life.

No abstract

Objective: To conduct a systematic review of studies assessing the relationship between exposure to pesticides and ADHD or Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). Methods: Based on a pre-registered protocol in PROPSERO (CRD42018107847), we searched PubMed, Ovid databases, and ISI Web of Knowledge with no date/language/document type restrictions, up to May 2019. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale was used to assess study quality. Results: Among the 29 retained studies, 13 focused on ADHD, 14 on ASD, and two on both disorders. Ten studies reported a significant association between exposure to pesticides and ADHD/ADHD symptoms and 12 studies found a significant association with ASD/ASD traits. The strengths of the association and the possible confounders controlled for varied substantially across studies. Conclusion: Whilst there is some evidence suggesting a possible link between pesticides and ADHD/ASD, heterogeneity across studies prevents firm conclusions. We provide methodological indications for future studies.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract