MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282840802 · doi:10.1093/cdn/nzac054.050

Diet Quality as a Moderator of Response to Multinutrients for ADHD and Emotional Dysregulation: The MADDY RCT

2022· article· en· W4282840802 on OpenAlexaff
Lisa M. Robinette, Irene Hatsu, Jeanette M. Johnstone, Brenda Leung, Laura Arnold

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Developments in Nutrition · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModerationPlaceboRandomized controlled trialOddsMicronutrientLogistic regressionOdds ratioMedicineInternal medicinePsychologyDemographyPhysical therapyClinical psychologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Micronutrients for ADHD in Youth (MADDY) study was an 8-week double-blind RCT of broad spectrum multinutrients (BSMN) for ADHD with emotional dysregulation in children ages 6–12. Primary outcome Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I) showed 3 times as many responders with BSMN (54%) as placebo (18%). Since diet is the primary source of nutrients intake, and diet quality corresponds with nutritional outcomes, this study seeks to determine the role of baseline diet quality as a moderator of treatment response to test the hypothesis that those with poor diet quality should benefit more. 124 children (69 BSMN, 55 placebo) in the intent-to-treat analysis had diet quality assessed by Healthy Eating Index-2015 (HEI-2015) component and total scores from the VioscreenTM FFQ. Primary outcome was odds of treatment response, defined by a rating of 1 or 2 (very much or much improved) on CGI-I at week 8. Sensitivity analysis used CGI-I at week 8 as a dimensional outcome (from 1 = very much improved to 7 = very much worse). Logistic regressions were conducted for the primary analysis and linear regressions for the sensitivity analysis, with HEI scores entered as potential moderators. Total HEI-2015 score did not moderate treatment response [odds ratio = 1.00 (95% CI: 0.90,1.10), p = 0.994] or improvement [β= −0.01 (95% CI: −0.06,0.04), p = 0.655]. HEI component scores also did not moderate treatment response, though total vegetable intake moderated level of improvement [β= −0.48 (95% CI: −0.82, −0.13), p = 0.007]: those with higher vegetable intake showed greater improvement with BSMN but not with placebo. BSMN may benefit children with ADHD and irritability regardless of diet quality. The finding that higher baseline vegetable intake possibly predisposes to improvement with BSMN is puzzling and worth further exploration of potential mechanisms such that a higher vegetable intake may promote the absorption or utilization of the multinutrients. This study was funded by Foundation for Excellence in Mental Health Care, Wells Fargo/Gratis Foundation, and CTSA award #s UL1TR002733, UL1TR002369.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score0.438

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.310 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Developments in NutritionSame topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderFrench-language works237,207