MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3156392683 · doi:10.1007/s40263-021-00808-x

Disruption of Pharmacotherapy During the Transition from Adolescence to Early Adulthood in Patients with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Claims Database Analysis Across the USA

2021· article· en· W3156392683 on OpenAlexaff
Sepehr Farahbakhshian, Rajeev Ayyagari, Daniel S. Barczak, Simerpal K. Gill, Wenxi Tang, Thomas Kulalert, Madeline Jenkins, William Spalding

Bibliographic record

VenueCNS Drugs · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsTakeda (Canada)
FundersTakeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A.
KeywordsPharmacotherapyDiscontinuationMedicinePediatricsAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderComorbidityMethylphenidateRetrospective cohort studyYoung adultMcNemar's testPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) treatment rates in adults are low, possibly owing to discontinuation of pediatric care due to various circumstances (including inadequate health insurance coverage, poor disease insight, and patient/family resistance, as well as those who manage their ADHD independent of pharmacologic intervention) during the transition from adolescence to adulthood. To improve the understanding of treatment patterns during this transition, this study characterized pharmacotherapy use in patients with ADHD aged 16-21 years. METHODS: Commercial Databases, which represent all census regions of the USA, included patients aged 16-21 years with two or more ADHD diagnoses between 1/1/2008 and 12/31/2017 (one or more diagnoses during the year of age 17) who were continuously enrolled from ages 16-21 years and prescribed ADHD medication for ≥ 6 months at age 17 years. Pharmacotherapy use was assessed longitudinally. Comparisons between ages were conducted using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and McNemar tests. Treatment discontinuation was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analyses. RESULTS: The analysis included 10,292 patients. The overall percentage of patients receiving pharmacotherapy significantly decreased (p < 0.001, regardless of treatment type and presence of co-occurring psychiatric disorders) as patients aged, with a median time to treatment discontinuation of 2.94 years. Among patients using pharmacotherapy at the age of 17 years, more than 30% were no longer using pharmacotherapy at age 21 years. As patients aged, the percentage using long-acting amphetamines or methylphenidates decreased, and the percentage receiving no treatment increased. The percentage of patients with disrupted treatment from age 18 to 21 years ranged from 17.9 to 24.1%. After transitioning to disrupted treatment or no treatment, low percentages of patients returned to pharmacotherapy use (disrupted treatment: 15.7-21.5% per year; no treatment, 2.7-3.8% per year). Across all age groups, statistically significantly greater (p < 0.05) percentages of patients with co-occurring psychiatric disorders used lisdexamfetamine, dextroamphetamine-amphetamine mix short acting, and non-stimulants compared with patients without co-occurring psychiatric disorders. Patients with co-occurring psychiatric disorders remained on ADHD pharmacotherapy longer and switched or augmented their pharmacotherapy more frequently than patients without co-occurring psychiatric comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Patients rarely reinitiated treatment after pharmacotherapy was disrupted or discontinued, emphasizing the need for increased focus on the management of ADHD as patients transition from adolescence to adulthood.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCNS DrugsSame topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderFrench-language works237,207