MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3211117991 · doi:10.1089/cap.2021.0087

Effect of a Multilayer, Extended-Release Methylphenidate Formulation (PRC-063) on Sleep in Adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Fixed-Dose, Placebo-Controlled Trial Followed by a 6-Month Open-Label Follow-Up

2021· article· en· W3211117991 on OpenAlexaff
Margaret D. Weiss, Craig Surman, Atul Khullar, Judith Owens, Ellie He, Marc Cataldo, Graeme Donnelly

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsPurdue Pharma (Canada)University of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPittsburgh Sleep Quality IndexPlaceboTolerabilityDouble blindMethylphenidateDosingMedicineAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderRandomized controlled trialPlacebo-controlled studyAnesthesiaPsychologyAdverse effectInternal medicinePsychiatrySleep qualityInsomnia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: We analyzed patient-reported sleep parameters for an extended-release methylphenidate formulation (PRC-063) in adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Methods: Clinical efficacy and long-term safety/tolerability data from a 4-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, fixed-dose study (NCT02139111) and a subsequent 6-month, optimized-dose, open-label extension (OLE) study (NCT02168127) were used. In the double-blind study, participants were randomly assigned 1:1:1:1:1 to one of four doses of PRC-063 (25, 45, 70, or 85 mg/day) or placebo. In both the double-blind and OLE studies, sleep outcomes were assessed using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). Results: During double-blind treatment, no statistically significant least-squares mean difference in change from baseline between PRC-063 (all doses combined; N = 293) and placebo ( N = 74) was found for either global PSQI score (−0.3 vs. −0.5; p = 0.6110) or scores for any of the seven PSQI subscales. Compared with the placebo group, a marginally higher proportion of patients in the PRC-063 group (all doses combined) went from being poor to good sleepers (global PSQI score ≤5; 14.4% vs. 11.3%). In a logistic regression analysis, study treatment was not a predictor of poor sleep ( p = 0.5368) at the end of the double-blind study. In the OLE study, there was a trend of improvement in sleep after 1 month of individualized dosing that was maintained through 6 months. Sleep efficiency (time asleep as a proportion of time in bed) showed improvement at the end of the OLE study. Conclusion: While individual patients may experience changes in sleep as an adverse event, group data evaluating sleep as an outcome found there were no differences between PRC-063 and placebo in self-reported sleep outcomes on the PSQI.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Child and Adolescent PsychopharmacologySame topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderFrench-language works237,207