MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308015123 · doi:10.1186/s40337-022-00674-y

Effect of stimulant medication on loss of control eating in youth with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a prospective, observational case series study protocol

2022· article· en· W4308015123 on OpenAlexafffund
Aaron Keshen, Anja Hilbert, Victoria Taylor, Anastasia Harris, Nami Trappenberg, Joseph Sadek, Guido Frank, Stuart B. Murray

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Eating Disorders · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Health AuthorityDalhousie University
FundersTakeda Canada
KeywordsImpulsivityStimulantAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderNeurocognitivePsychologyObservational studyAnxietyPsychiatryClinical psychologyMoodCognitionMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Loss of control eating (LOC-E) in youth predicts the later development of full-syndrome binge-eating disorder (BED), and therefore, could be a relevant target for prevention treatments. To develop these treatments, it is important to understand the underlying disease processes and mechanisms. Based on the putative role of neurocognitive impairments in the pathogenesis of LOC-E, treatments that modulate these neurocognitive factors warrant further exploration. For instance, stimulants are an effective treatment for impulsivity in youth with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and have been shown to improve symptoms of BED in adults. Notably, stimulants have not been examined as a treatment for LOC-E in youth. To explore this gap, we aim to measure change in LOC-E episodes and secondary outcomes in youth with comorbid ADHD and LOC-E who are being started on stimulants. METHODS: We will collect prospective observational data on forty 8-to-13-year-old youth diagnosed with comorbid ADHD and LOC-E who are initiating a stimulant for ADHD. Prior to stimulant initiation, participants will complete baseline measures including LOC-E episode frequency in the last 3 months (primary outcome), and secondary outcomes including disordered eating cognitions, emotions and behaviors, ADHD symptom severity, parental LOC-E, impulsivity and reward sensitivity, and anxiety/mood severity. Outcome measurements will be gathered again at 3-months after initiating the stimulant. Within-patient standardized effect sizes with 95% confidence intervals will be calculated from baseline to 3-month follow-up for all outcomes. DISCUSSION: Many individuals with LOC-E or binge eating do not fully remit over the course of psychotherapy. Whereas psychotherapy may address psychological and sociocultural domains associated with LOC-E, some individuals with neurocognitive impairments (e.g., ADHD) and neurobiological deficits (e.g., low intrasynaptic dopamine or norepinephrine) may benefit from adjunctive treatment that targets those factors. This will be the first study to provide pilot data for future studies that could examine both the effect of stimulants on LOC-E in youth and underlying mechanisms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registration number: NCT05592119.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.317 · 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
GenreProtocol

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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Eating DisordersSame topicEating Disorders and BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207