Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the reporting of race/ethnicity data in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medications. Secondary objectives were to estimate temporal trends in the reporting, and to compare the pooled prevalence of racial/ethnic groups in RCTs conducted in the US to national estimates. METHOD/METHODS:We drew on, adapted, and updated the search of a network meta-analysis by Cortese et al. (2018) up to March 2022. We calculated the percentage of RCTs reporting data on race/ethnicity of participants in the published article or in related unpublished material. Temporal trends were estimated with logistic regression. The pooled prevalence of each racial/ethnic group across US RCTs was calculated using random-effects model meta-analyses. RESULTS:We retained 310 RCTs (including 44,447 participants), of which 231 were conducted in children/adolescents, 78 in adults, and 1 in both. Data on race/ethnicity were reported in 59.3% of the RCTs (75% of which were conducted in children/adolescents and 25% in adults) in the published article, and in unpublished material in an additional 8.7% of the RCTs. Reporting improved over time. In the US RCTs, Asian and White individuals were under- and overrepresented, respectively, compared to national estimates in the most recent time period considered. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:More than 30% of the RCTs of ADHD medications retained in this review did not include data on race/ethnicity in their published or unpublished reports, and more than 40% in their published articles, even though reporting improved over time. Results should inform investigators, authors, editors, regulators, and study participants in relation to efforts to tackle inequalities in ADHD research. DIVERSITY & INCLUSION STATEMENT/UNASSIGNED:One or more of the authors of this paper self-identifies as a member of one or more historically underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups in science. We actively worked to promote sex and gender balance in our author group. While citing references scientifically relevant for this work, we also actively worked to promote sex and gender balance in our reference list. While citing references scientifically relevant for this work, we also actively worked to promote inclusion of historically underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups in science in our reference list. The author list of this paper includes contributors from the location and/or community where the research was conducted who participated in the data collection, design, analysis, and/or interpretation of the work.

Despite decades of clinical use and a large body of evidence, the WHO continues to exclude methylphenidate for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) from its EML.¹ The exclusion of methylphenidate has dire implications for millions of individuals with ADHD worldwide, especially those living in low and low-middle income countries (LMIC), where governmental decisions to make medicines available are contingent on EML listing.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Observational studies are fraught with several biases including reverse causation and residual confounding. Overview of reviews of observational studies (ie, umbrella reviews) synthesise systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses of cross-sectional, case-control and cohort studies, and may also aid in the grading of the credibility of reported associations. The number of published umbrella reviews has been increasing. Recently, a reporting guideline for overviews of reviews of healthcare interventions (Preferred Reporting Items for Overviews of Reviews (PRIOR)) was published, but the field lacks reporting guidelines for umbrella reviews of observational studies. Our aim is to develop a reporting guideline for umbrella reviews on cross-sectional, case-control and cohort studies assessing epidemiological associations. METHODS AND ANALYSIS/METHODS:We will adhere to established guidance and prepare a PRIOR extension for systematic reviews of cross-sectional, case-control and cohort studies testing epidemiological associations between an exposure and an outcome, namely Preferred Reporting Items for Umbrella Reviews of Cross-sectional, Case-control and Cohort studies (PRIUR-CCC). Step 1 will be the project launch to identify stakeholders. Step 2 will be a literature review of available guidance to conduct umbrella reviews. Step 3 will be an online Delphi study sampling 100 participants among authors and editors of umbrella reviews. Step 4 will encompass the finalisation of PRIUR-CCC statement, including a checklist, a flow diagram, explanation and elaboration document. Deliverables will be (i) identifying stakeholders to involve according to relevant expertise and end-user groups, with an equity, diversity and inclusion lens; (ii) completing a narrative review of methodological guidance on how to conduct umbrella reviews, a narrative review of methodology and reporting in published umbrella reviews and preparing an initial PRIUR-CCC checklist for Delphi study round 1; (iii) preparing a PRIUR-CCC checklist with guidance after Delphi study; (iv) publishing and disseminating PRIUR-CCC statement. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION/BACKGROUND:PRIUR-CCC has been approved by The Ottawa Health Science Network Research Ethics Board and has obtained consent (20220639-01H). Participants to step 3 will give informed consent. PRIUR-CCC steps will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and will guide reporting of umbrella reviews on epidemiological associations.

IMPORTANCE/UNASSIGNED:The use of evidence-based standardized outcome measures is increasingly recognized as key to guiding clinical decision-making in mental health. Implementation of these measures into clinical practice has been hampered by lack of clarity on what to measure and how to do this in a reliable and standardized way. OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:To develop a core set of outcome measures for specific neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs), such as attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), communication disorders, specific learning disorders, and motor disorders, that may be used across a range of geographic and cultural settings. EVIDENCE REVIEW/UNASSIGNED:An international working group composed of clinical and research experts and service users (n = 27) was convened to develop a standard core set of accessible, valid, and reliable outcome measures for children and adolescents with NDDs. The working group participated in 9 video conference calls and 8 surveys between March 1, 2021, and June 30, 2022. A modified Delphi approach defined the scope, outcomes, included measures, case-mix variables, and measurement time points. After development, the NDD set was distributed to professionals and service users for open review, feedback, and external validation. FINDINGS/UNASSIGNED:The final set recommends measuring 12 outcomes across 3 key domains: (1) core symptoms related to the diagnosis; (2) impact, functioning, and quality of life; and (3) common coexisting problems. The following 14 measures should be administered at least every 6 months to monitor these outcomes: ADHD Rating Scale 5, Vanderbilt ADHD Diagnostic Rating Scale, or Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham Rating Scale IV; Affective Reactivity Index; Children's Communication Checklist 2; Colorado Learning Disabilities Questionnaire; Children's Sleep Habits Questionnaire; Developmental-Disability Children's Global Assessment Scale; Developmental Coordination Disorder Questionnaire; Family Strain Index; Intelligibility in Context Scale; Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scale or Repetitive Behavior Scale-Revised and Social Responsiveness Scale; Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scales; and Yale Global Tic Severity Scale. The external review survey was completed by 32 professionals and 40 service users. The NDD set items were endorsed by more than 70% of professionals and service users in the open review survey. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE/UNASSIGNED:The NDD set covers outcomes of most concern to patients and caregivers. Use of the NDD set has the potential to improve clinical practice and research.

OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:To investigate shared and specific neural correlates of cognitive functions in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and autism spectrum disorder (ASD), the authors performed a comprehensive meta-analysis and considered a balanced set of neuropsychological tasks across the two disorders. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:A broad set of electronic databases was searched up to December 4, 2022, for task-based functional MRI studies investigating differences between individuals with ADHD or ASD and typically developing control subjects. Spatial coordinates of brain loci differing significantly between case and control subjects were extracted. To avoid potential diagnosis-driven selection bias of cognitive tasks, the tasks were grouped according to the Research Domain Criteria framework, and stratified sampling was used to match cognitive component profiles. Activation likelihood estimation was used for the meta-analysis. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:After screening 20,756 potentially relevant references, a meta-analysis of 243 studies was performed, which included 3,084 participants with ADHD (676 females), 2,654 participants with ASD (292 females), and 6,795 control subjects (1,909 females). ASD and ADHD showed shared greater activations in the lingual and rectal gyri and shared lower activations in regions including the middle frontal gyrus, the parahippocampal gyrus, and the insula. By contrast, there were ASD-specific greater and lower activations in regions including the left middle temporal gyrus and the left middle frontal gyrus, respectively, and ADHD-specific greater and lower activations in the amygdala and the global pallidus, respectively. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Although ASD and ADHD showed both shared and disorder-specific standardized neural activations, disorder-specific activations were more prominent than shared ones. Functional brain differences between ADHD and ASD are more likely to reflect diagnosis-related pathophysiology than bias from the selection of specific neuropsychological tasks.

INTRODUCTION/UNASSIGNED:Sleep disorders represent an important comorbidity in individuals with ADHD. While the links between ADHD and sleep disturbances have been extensively investigated, research on the management of sleep disorders in individuals with ADHD is relatively limited, albeit expanding. AREAS COVERED/UNASSIGNED:The authors searched PubMed, Medline, PsycInfo, Embase+Embase Classic, Web of Sciences databases, and clinicaltrials.gov up to 4 January 2024, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of any intervention for sleep disorders associated with ADHD. They retained 16 RCTs (eight on pharmacological and eight on non-pharmacological interventions), supporting behavioral intervention and melatonin, and nine ongoing RCTs registered on clinicaltrials.gov. EXPERT OPINION/UNASSIGNED:The pool of RCTs testing interventions for sleep disorders in individuals with ADHD is expanding. However, to inform clinical guidelines, there is a need for additional research in several areas, including 1) RCTs based on a precise phenotyping of sleep disorders; 2) pragmatic RCTs recruiting neurodevelopmental populations representative of those seen in clinical services; 3) trials testing alternative interventions (e.g. suvorexant or light therapy) or ways to deliver them (e.g. online); 4) sequential and longer-term RCTs; 5) studies testing the impact of sleep interventions on outcomes other than sleep; 6) and implementation of advanced evidence synthesis and precision medicine approaches.

OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:Evidence on the efficacy of social skills training for adolescents with Level 1 Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is unclear. METHOD/UNASSIGNED:We searched Pubmed, Scopus, and Web of Science until July 27th, 2023, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of social skills training for pre-adolescents and adolescents (aged 9-18) with Level 1 ASD. We then pooled data on efficacy from individual RCTs by conducting multivariate mixed-effects meta-analyses in R. We estimated possible bias in the retained RCTs using the RoB2 tool. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:We retained 36 RCTs (encompassing 2796 participants), including 18 RCTs comparing an experimental treatment to a waiting list, and 18 RCTs comparing it to standard care/control treatment. Meta-analyses showed that experimental treatments were significantly more efficacious than waiting list or standard care/ control treatments in improving social skills (SMD = 0.3745; 95%CI = [0.2396; 0.5093]), as well as reducing behavioral symptoms (0.3154;0.1783, 0.4525) and anxious/depressive symptoms (0.2780; 0.0432, 0.5128). However, for some outcomes there was significant heterogeneity across studies and evidence of publication bias. Subgroup analyses and meta-regressions did not identify any specific clinical or demographic factors as significant predictors of outcome. The most common risk of bias across studies was related to deviations from intended interventions and measurement of the outcomes. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:At the group level, social skills training for adolescents with Level 1 ASD is efficacious, with small-to-moderate effect size. Future research should focus on personalized medicine approaches, aimed at tailoring interventions to specific characteristics of adolescents with Level 1 ASD.

We provide here the first bottom-up review of the lived experience of mental disorders in adolescents co-designed, co-conducted and co-written by experts by experience and academics. We screened first-person accounts within and outside the medical field, and discussed them in collaborative workshops involving numerous experts by experience - representing different genders, ethnic and cultural backgrounds, and continents - and their family members and carers. Subsequently, the material was enriched by phenomenologically informed perspectives and shared with all collaborators. The inner subjective experience of adolescents is described for mood disorders, psychotic disorders, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, autism spectrum disorders, anxiety disorders, eating disorders, externalizing disorders, and self-harm behaviors. The recollection of individuals' past histories also indexes the prodromal (often transdiagnostic) features predating the psychiatric diagnosis. The experience of adolescents with mental disorders in the wider society is described with respect to their family, their school and peers, and the social and cultural context. Furthermore, their lived experience of mental health care is described with respect to receiving a diagnosis of mental disorder, accessing mental health support, receiving psychopharmacological treatment, receiving psychotherapy, experiencing peer support and mental health activism, and achieving recovery. These findings can impact clinical practice, research, and the whole society. We hope that this co-designed, co-conducted and co-written journey can help us maintain our commitment to protecting adolescents' fragile mental health, and can help them develop into a healthy, fulfilling and contributing adult life.