MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986869912 · doi:10.1017/s1047951111000928

Cardiovascular considerations of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder medications: a report of the European Network on Hyperactivity Disorders work group, European Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Guidelines Group on attention deficit hyperactivity disorder drug safety meeting

2011· article· en· W1986869912 on OpenAlexaff
Robert M. Hamilton, Éric Rosenthal, Martin Hulpke‐Wette, John G. I. Graham, Joseph A. Sergeant

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiology in the Young · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderMedicinePsychiatryPopulationAttention deficit disorder

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Regulatory decisions regarding attention deficit hyperactivity disorder drug licensing and labelling, along with recent statements from professional associations, raise questions of practice regarding the evaluation and treatment of patients with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. To address these issues for the European community, the European Network for Hyperkinetic Disorders, through its European Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Guidelines Group, organised a meeting between attention deficit hyperactivity disorder specialists, paediatric cardiovascular specialists, and representatives of the major market authorisation holders for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder medications. This manuscript represents their consensus on cardiovascular aspects of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder medications. Although sudden death has been identified in multiple young individuals on attention deficit hyperactivity disorder medication causing regulatory concern, when analysed for exposure using currently available data, sudden death does not appear to exceed that of the general population. There is no current evidence to suggest an incremental benefit to electrocardiography assessment of the general attention deficit hyperactivity disorder patient. Congenital heart disease patients have an increased prevalence of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and can benefit from attention deficit hyperactivity disorder therapies, including medication. The attention deficit hyperactivity disorder specialist is the appropriate individual to evaluate benefit and risk and recommend therapy in all patients, although discussion with a heart specialist is reasonable for congenital heart disease patients. For attention deficit hyperactivity disorder patients with suspected heart disease or risk factor/s for sudden death, assessment by a heart specialist is recommended, as would also be the case for a non-attention deficit hyperactivity disorder patient. The identification of risk factors for sudden death should not automatically exclude the use of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder medication.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCardiology in the YoungSame topicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studiesFrench-language works237,207