Reduction of Loss of Control Eating in Youth With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Following Initiation of Stimulant Medication
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This prospective observational study aimed to examine changes in loss of control eating (LOC-E) over a 3-month period in youth with comorbid attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and LOC-E who initiated stimulant medication. Secondary objectives included examining changes in eating disorder cognitions, ADHD symptoms, reward sensitivity, impulsivity, and mood/anxiety symptoms. METHOD: Ten youth aged 8 to 13 years (50% female) with diagnosed ADHD and LOC-E were recruited from private practices in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. Participants initiated stimulant pharmacotherapy (methylphenidate or lisdexamfetamine dimesylate) and completed baseline and 3-month follow-up assessments. Measures included semi-structured interviews and validated questionnaires assessing LOC-E frequency, eating disorder cognitions, ADHD symptoms, reward sensitivity, and mood/anxiety. RESULTS: LOC-E episode frequency decreased from a baseline mean of 10.30 episodes (SD=6.17) to 2.10 episodes (SD=1.37) at follow-up. Nine of 10 participants reported reduced LOC-E, with one reporting full cessation. Improvements were also observed in eating disorder cognitions, ADHD symptoms, and mood/anxiety. Changes in reward sensitivity were small and variable. CONCLUSION: Findings provide preliminary support for a potential relationship between stimulant medication and reduced LOC-E and associated symptoms in youth with ADHD and comorbid LOC-E. Results mostly align with prior adult studies evaluating lisdexamfetamine for binge-eating disorder. Larger, controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings and investigate neurocognitive mechanisms. This study offers early evidence to inform future pharmacological approaches to treat ADHD and LOC-E in youth.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".