The Effects of Extended-Release Stimulant Medication on Sleep in Children with ADHD.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Although stimulant medications, such as methylphenidate hydrochloride (MPH), are effective at reducing the core symptoms of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), they may also disrupt children's sleep. This study aimed to investigate the acute impact of extended-release MPH on sleep using both actigraphy and polysomnography (PSG). METHOD: = 24.5mos) who were enrolled in a clinically-administered crossover medication trial with 2 conditions: 2 weeks of placebo and 2 weeks of MPH treatment. The effect of condition on sleep variables as measured by actigraphy (primary outcome) and PSG (secondary outcome) was analyzed using repeated measures MANOVAs. RESULTS: Based on actigraphy data, total sleep time was significantly reduced by 30 minutes and sleep onset latency was significantly increased by 30 minutes in the MPH condition compared to the placebo condition (p<0.001). No differences were found in sleep efficiency. No statistically significant differences were found for the same variables assessed by PSG; however, the means were in the same direction as the actigraphy data. There was a significant increase in the relative percentage of stage N3 sleep by 3.2% during MPH treatment (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Increased sleep onset latency resulting in reduced total sleep time, which has been linked to poorer daytime functioning, is a potential adverse effect of stimulant medication which may require management to optimize outcome.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".