A randomized, double-blind, cross-over, phase IV trial of oros-methylphenidate (CONCERTA <sup>®</sup> ) and generic novo-methylphenidate ER-C (NOVO-generic)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common neurobehavioral disorder with onset during childhood. Multiple aspects of a child's development are hindered, in both home and school settings, with negative impacts on social, emotional, and cognitive functioning. If left untreated, ADHD is commonly associated with poor academic achievement and low occupational status, as well as increased risk of substance abuse and delinquency. The objective of this study was to evaluate adult ADHD subject reported outcomes when switched from a stable dose of CONCERTA(®) to the same dose of generic Novo-methylphenidate ER-C(®). METHODS: Randomized, double-blind, cross-over, phase IV trial consisted of two phases in which participants with a primary diagnosis of ADHD were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to 3 weeks of treatment with CONCERTA or generic Novo-Methylphenidate ER-C. Following 3 weeks of treatment, participants were crossed-over to receive the other treatment for an additional 3 weeks. Primary efficacy was assessed through the use of the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication, Version II (TSQM-II). RESULTS: Participants with ADHD treated with CONCERTA were more satisfied in terms of efficacy and side effects compared to those receiving an equivalent dose of generic Novo-Methylphenidate ER-C. All participants chose to continue with CONCERTA treatment at the conclusion of the study. CONCLUSION: Although CONCERTA and generic Novo-Methylphenidate ER-C have been deemed bioequivalent, however the present findings demonstrate clinically and statistically significant differences between generic and branded CONCERTA. Further investigation of these differences is warranted.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it