The impact of the withdrawal of Adderall XR (long-acting mixed amphetamine salts) from the Canadian market on paediatric patients and their families
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adderall XR (Shire BioChem Inc, Canada), a medication used to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, was withdrawn from the Canadian market in February 2005 due to concerns of possible cardiotoxicity and cerebral vascular events among a small number of individuals who had taken the medication. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of the present study was to investigate the degree to which the physician's relationship with the families of the patients to whom the medication was prescribed was affected by the withdrawal of Adderall XR from the Canadian market. The study sought to explore the perceptions of caregivers of patients who took Adderall XR to the drug recall. As a secondary objective, the study also assessed the differences in perception of caregivers toward physicians compared with their perception of other agencies involved with the recall. METHODS: Questionnaires were sent to the caregivers of 123 patients who had been taking the drug at the time of the withdrawal. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Of the 53 (43%) completed questionnaires, 89% of respondents indicated that they were concerned when informed of the withdrawal, while 58% indicated that they were frightened. Despite the concerns, only a modest degree of anger was expressed. Thirty per cent of respondents reported anger directed at Health Canada, 24% reported anger directed at the manufacturer, while no caregiver reported anger directed at their physician. Only three families (5.7%) indicated a decrease in confidence in the physician following the event. Fifty-eight per cent indicated a willingness to resume taking Adderall XR, if it was deemed safe by Health Canada. These results offer insight into patient and family perspectives following an unexpected medication recall. While caregivers were generally concerned and often frightened by this event, the present data do not suggest that the parent-physician relationship was greatly affected.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".