Mediators of methylphenidate effects on math performance in children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder

Methylphenidate for children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)

BACKGROUND

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most commonly diagnosed and treated psychiatric disorders in childhood. Typically, children and adolescents with ADHD find it difficult to pay attention and they are hyperactive and impulsive. Methylphenidate is the psychostimulant most often prescribed, but the evidence on benefits and harms is uncertain. This is an update of our comprehensive systematic review on benefits and harms published in 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of methylphenidate for children and adolescents with ADHD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases and two trials registers up to March 2022. In addition, we checked reference lists and requested published and unpublished data from manufacturers of methylphenidate.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised clinical trials (RCTs) comparing methylphenidate versus placebo or no intervention in children and adolescents aged 18 years and younger with a diagnosis of ADHD. The search was not limited by publication year or language, but trial inclusion required that 75% or more of participants had a normal intellectual quotient (IQ > 70). We assessed two primary outcomes, ADHD symptoms and serious adverse events, and three secondary outcomes, adverse events considered non-serious, general behaviour, and quality of life.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently conducted data extraction and risk of bias assessment for each trial. Six review authors including two review authors from the original publication participated in the update in 2022. We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Data from parallel-group trials and first-period data from cross-over trials formed the basis of our primary analyses. We undertook separate analyses using end-of-last period data from cross-over trials. We used Trial Sequential Analyses (TSA) to control for type I (5%) and type II (20%) errors, and we assessed and downgraded evidence according to the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 212 trials (16,302 participants randomised); 55 parallel-group trials (8104 participants randomised), and 156 cross-over trials (8033 participants randomised) as well as one trial with a parallel phase (114 participants randomised) and a cross-over phase (165 participants randomised). The mean age of participants was 9.8 years ranging from 3 to 18 years (two trials from 3 to 21 years). The male-female ratio was 3:1. Most trials were carried out in high-income countries, and 86/212 included trials (41%) were funded or partly funded by the pharmaceutical industry. Methylphenidate treatment duration ranged from 1 to 425 days, with a mean duration of 28.8 days. Trials compared methylphenidate with placebo (200 trials) and with no intervention (12 trials). Only 165/212 trials included usable data on one or more outcomes from 14,271 participants. Of the 212 trials, we assessed 191 at high risk of bias and 21 at low risk of bias. If, however, deblinding of methylphenidate due to typical adverse events is considered, then all 212 trials were at high risk of bias.

PRIMARY OUTCOMES

methylphenidate versus placebo or no intervention may improve teacher-rated ADHD symptoms (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.88 to -0.61; I² = 38%; 21 trials; 1728 participants; very low-certainty evidence). This corresponds to a mean difference (MD) of -10.58 (95% CI -12.58 to -8.72) on the ADHD Rating Scale (ADHD-RS; range 0 to 72 points). The minimal clinically relevant difference is considered to be a change of 6.6 points on the ADHD-RS. Methylphenidate may not affect serious adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.67; I² = 0%; 26 trials, 3673 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The TSA-adjusted intervention effect was RR 0.91 (CI 0.31 to 2.68).

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

methylphenidate may cause more adverse events considered non-serious versus placebo or no intervention (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.37; I² = 72%; 35 trials 5342 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The TSA-adjusted intervention effect was RR 1.22 (CI 1.08 to 1.43). Methylphenidate may improve teacher-rated general behaviour versus placebo (SMD -0.62, 95% CI -0.91 to -0.33; I² = 68%; 7 trials 792 participants; very low-certainty evidence), but may not affect quality of life (SMD 0.40, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.83; I² = 81%; 4 trials, 608 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The majority of our conclusions from the 2015 version of this review still apply. Our updated meta-analyses suggest that methylphenidate versus placebo or no-intervention may improve teacher-rated ADHD symptoms and general behaviour in children and adolescents with ADHD. There may be no effects on serious adverse events and quality of life. Methylphenidate may be associated with an increased risk of adverse events considered non-serious, such as sleep problems and decreased appetite. However, the certainty of the evidence for all outcomes is very low and therefore the true magnitude of effects remain unclear. Due to the frequency of non-serious adverse events associated with methylphenidate, the blinding of participants and outcome assessors is particularly challenging. To accommodate this challenge, an active placebo should be sought and utilised. It may be difficult to find such a drug, but identifying a substance that could mimic the easily recognised adverse effects of methylphenidate would avert the unblinding that detrimentally affects current randomised trials. Future systematic reviews should investigate the subgroups of patients with ADHD that may benefit most and least from methylphenidate. This could be done with individual participant data to investigate predictors and modifiers like age, comorbidity, and ADHD subtypes.

The effects of first-dose methylphenidate on the neural signatures of visual selective attention in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

Although methylphenidate (MPH) has been shown to significantly improve selective attention in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), the neural mechanism of this effect remains unclear. We investigated the effects of first-dose MPH on the neural signatures of visual selective attention in children with ADHD. We measured the impact of first-dose MPH on electrophysiological indexes from eighteen children with ADHD (8.9-15.2 years; 15 boys) while they performed a visual search task. MPH was administered in a double-blind placebo-controlled crossover design. MPH led to decreases in behavioral error rates and reaction times. For the electrophysiological indexes, MPH significantly increased the target-elicited N2pc amplitude and posterior P3 amplitude during the selective attention process. The trial-based correlation analysis revealed that the enhanced N2pc (more negative) and P3 (more positive) promoted the behavioral response speed for children with ADHD. The lower individual P3 amplitude was associated with higher severity of inattention symptoms. The severer inattention symptoms were related to weaker MPH effect on N2pc amplitude. These findings suggest that N2pc and P3 are closely related to the mechanism of MPH in the ADHD treatment.

Academic functioning in children with and without sluggish cognitive tempo

Sluggish cognitive tempo (SCT) is increasingly conceptualized as a transdiagnostic set of symptoms associated with poorer functional outcomes, although the extent to which SCT is associated with academic functioning remains unclear. This study recruited children based on the presence or absence of clinically elevated SCT symptoms, using a multi-informant and multi-method design to provide a comprehensive examination of academic functioning in children with and without clinically elevated SCT symptoms. Participants were 207 children in Grades 2-5 (ages 7-11 years; 63.3% male), including 103 with clinically elevated teacher-reported SCT symptoms and 104 without elevated SCT, closely matched on grade and sex. A multi-informant, multi-method design that included standardized achievement testing, curriculum-based measurement (CBM), grades, classroom and laboratory observations, and parent and teacher rating scales was used. Children with elevated SCT symptoms had poorer academic functioning than their peers across most domains examined. Specifically, compared to children without SCT, children with elevated SCT had significantly lower grade point average (d = 0.42) and standardized achievement scores (ds = 0.40-0.77), poorer CBM performance including lower productivity (ds = 0.39-0.51), poorer homework performance and organizational skills (ds = 0.58-0.85), and lower teacher-reported academic skills (ds = 0.63-0.74) and academic enablers (ds = 0.66-0.74). The groups did not significantly differ on percentage of time on task during classroom observations or academic enabler interpersonal skills. Most effects were robust to control of family income, medication use, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder inattentive symptoms, although effects for motivation and study skills academic enablers were reduced. This study demonstrates that children with clinically elevated SCT symptoms have wide-ranging academic difficulties compared to their peers without SCT. Findings point to the potential importance of assessing and treating SCT to improve academic outcomes.

Can Neurocognitive Outcomes Assist Measurement-Based Care for Children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of the Relationships Among the Changes in Neurocognitive Functions and Clinical Outcomes of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in Pharmacological and Cognitive Training Interventions

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common neurodevelopmental conditions among school-age children. Early intervention and ongoing evaluation of treatment effectiveness are essential to minimize the life-long negative impact of ADHD. Neurocognitive functions have been reported to improve with pharmacological and cognitive training interventions for children with ADHD. We evaluated the value of measuring change in neurocognitive functions following ADHD interventions as a treatment outcome. We systematically reviewed randomized control trials of two distinctive types of ADHD interventions-pharmacological treatments and cognitive training-and summarized the changes in neurocognitive and clinical outcomes using a series of meta-analyses. Both pharmacological and cognitive training interventions showed positive effects on some aspects of neurocognitive functions. However, there were no significant correlations between changes in neurocognitive function (e.g., inhibition) and changes in ADHD behavioral symptoms (e.g., impulsive behavior). Although the associations between changes in neurocognitive function and clinical outcomes are not well studied, based on current findings, it is not suitable to use change in neurocognitive outcomes as a proxy for change in ADHD clinical symptom-based outcomes. There is, however, notable value in monitoring changes in neurocognitive function associated with ADHD interventions to achieve the following aims: (1) understanding full treatment effect on children with ADHD, (2) identifying ancillary indicators of subclinical changes, and (3) provision of objective and less biased measures of treatment effects. These findings are important evidence that changes in neurocognitive function could be a co-occurring objective indication that parallels the clinical effects of ADHD treatments.

Methylphenidate-Related Improvements in Math Performance Cannot Be Explained by Better Cognitive Functioning or Higher Academic Motivation: Evidence From a Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective: This study investigated whether improvements in working memory, reaction time, lapses of attention, interference control, academic motivation, and perceived competence mediated effects of methylphenidate on math performance. Method: Sixty-three children (ADHD diagnosis; methylphenidate treatment; age 8-13; IQ > 70) were randomly allocated to a 7-day methylphenidate or placebo treatment in this double-blind placebo-controlled crossover study and compared with 67 controls. Data were collected at schools and analyzed using mixed-model analysis. Methylphenidate was hypothesized to improve all measures; all measures were evaluated as potential mediators of methylphenidate-related math improvements. Results: Controls mostly outperformed the ADHD group. Methylphenidate did not affect measures of cognitive functioning (p = .082-.641) or academic motivation (p = .199-.865). Methylphenidate improved parent ratings of their child's self-perceived competence (p < .01), which mediated methylphenidate efficacy on math productivity. Conclusion: These results question the necessity of improvements in specific cognitive and motivational deficits associated with ADHD for medication-related academic improvement. They also stimulate further study of perceived competence as a mediator.

Does methylphenidate improve academic performance? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Academic improvement is amongst the most common treatment targets when prescribing stimulants to children with ADHD. Previous reviews on stimulant-related academic improvements are inconclusive and focus on task engagement. Recent literature suggests outcome-domain-specific medication effects that are larger for productivity than for accuracy. The aims of this study are quantifying methylphenidate effects on academic productivity and accuracy for math, reading, spelling; exploring the mediating or moderating effects of symptom improvements, demographic-, design- and disorder-related variables. PubMed, EMBASE, ERIC and PsycINFO were searched for articles reporting methylphenidate effects on academic productivity and accuracy. Thirty-four studies met entry criteria. Methylphenidate improved math productivity (7.8% increase, p < .001); math accuracy (3.0% increase, p = .001); increased reading speed (SMD .47, p < .001) but not reading accuracy. None of the mediators or moderators tested affected methylphenidate efficacy. Academic improvements were small compared to symptom improvements; qualitative changes limited to math. Clinicians should take this discrepancy into account when prescribing medication for ADHD.

How do stimulant treatments for ADHD work? Evidence for mediation by improved cognition

BACKGROUND

Stimulant medications such as methylphenidate (MPH) are the frontline treatment for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Despite their well-documented efficacy, the mechanisms by which stimulants improve clinical outcomes are not clear. The current study evaluated whether MPH effects on classroom behavior were mediated by improved cognitive functioning.

METHODS

Children with ADHD (n = 82; 9-12 years old) participated in a week-long summer research camp, consisting of cognitive testing, classroom periods, and recreational activities. After a baseline day, participants completed a 3-day randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of MPH (at doses approximating 0.3 and 0.6 mg/kg of immediate-release MPH dosed TID). Cognitive domains included inhibitory control (Stop Signal Task and prepulse inhibition of startle), attention (Continuous Performance Task and reaction time variability), and working memory (forward and backward spatial span). Clinical outcomes included math seatwork productivity and teacher-rated classroom behavior. A within-subjects path-analytic approach was used to test mediation. MPH-placebo and dose-response contrasts were used to evaluate drug effects.

RESULTS

Methylphenidate improved seatwork productivity and teacher ratings (ds = 1.4 and 1.1) and all domains of cognition (ds = 0.3-1.1). Inhibitory control (Stop Signal Task, SST) and working memory backward uniquely mediated the effect of MPH (vs. placebo) on productivity. Only working memory backward mediated the impact of MPH on teacher-rated behavior. The dose-response (0.6 vs. 0.3 mg/kg) effects were more modest for clinical outcomes (ds = 0.4 and 0.2) and cognition (ds = 0-0.3); there was no evidence of cognitive mediation of the clinical dose-response effects.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings are novel in demonstrating that specific cognitive processes mediate clinical improvement with stimulant treatment for ADHD. They converge with work on ADHD theory, neurobiology, and treatment development in suggesting that inhibitory control and working memory may be mechanisms of stimulant treatment response in ADHD. More work is necessary to evaluate the degree to which these findings generalize to chronic treatment, a broader array of clinical outcomes, and nonstimulant treatments.

Hallucinations and other psychotic symptoms in response to methylphenidate in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a Cochrane systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. Scand J Child Adolesc Psychiatr Psychol 2018;6:52-71. [PMID: 33520751 PMCID: PMC7750702 DOI: 10.21307/sjcapp-2018-003]

BACKGROUND

There is little evidence in the literature on the association between methylphenidate treatment and psychotic symptoms in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

OBJECTIVE

We examine the occurrence of psychotic symptoms during methylphenidate treatment of children and adolescents with ADHD. The data arise from our two Cochrane systematic reviews on methylphenidate, reported elsewhere.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched up to January 2016 (for observational studies) and March 2017 (for randomized trials). We summarized data as risk ratios and pooled prevalences. Trial Sequential Analysis was used to control for random errors. We assessed the risk of bias and the quality of evidence according to Cochrane guidelines.

RESULTS

Ten randomized trials (1103 participants), 17 non-randomized studies (76,237 participants) and 12 patient reports or series (18 patients) were identified. In the randomized trials, there was no significant difference in the risk of developing psychotic symptoms [10 of 654 (pooled prevalence, 2.5%) methylphenidate versus 1 of 508 (pooled prevalence, 1.7%) placebo patients; risk ratio, 2.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.58 to 7.35]. Nine of 10 trials had a high risk of bias, and according to the Trial Sequential Analysis, the required information size was not achieved, that is, the meta-analysis was considerably underpowered. There were 873 instances of psychotic symptoms in the non-randomized studies among 55,603 participants (pooled prevalence, 1.2%; 95% confidence interval, 0.7 to 2.4). In the comparative cohort study, methylphenidate significantly increased the risk for any psychotic disorder by 36% (risk ratio, 1.36; 95% confidence interval, 1.17 to 1.57). The overall risk of bias was rated as critical for this study.

CONCLUSIONS

Because of sparse data and low quality of evidence, we cannot confirm or refute whether methylphenidate increases the risk of psychotic symptoms in children and adolescents with ADHD. This possible adverse event may affect 1.1% to 2.5%, and physicians, patients and caregivers should be aware of this to ensure proper treatment in case of occurrence during methylphenidate treatment.

Short-Term Effects of Methylphenidate on Math Productivity in Children With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder are Mediated by Symptom Improvements: Evidence From a Placebo-Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Although numerous studies report positive effects of methylphenidate on academic performance, the mechanism behind these improvements remains unclear. This study investigates the effects of methylphenidate on academic performance in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and the mediating and moderating influence of ADHD severity, academic performance, and ADHD symptom improvement.

METHODS

Sixty-three children with ADHD participated in a double-blind placebo-controlled crossover study comparing the effects of long-acting methylphenidate and placebo. Dependent variables were math, reading, and spelling performance. The ADHD group performance was compared with a group of 67 typically developing children.

RESULTS

Methylphenidate improved math productivity and accuracy in children with ADHD. The effect of methylphenidate on math productivity was partly explained by parent-rated symptom improvement, with greater efficacy for children showing more symptom improvement. Further, children showing below-average math performance while on placebo profited more from methylphenidate than children showing above-average math performance.

CONCLUSIONS

The results from this study indicate positive effects of methylphenidate on academic performance, although these were limited to math abilities. In light of these results, expectations of parents, teachers, and treating physicians about the immediate effects of methylphenidate on academic improvement should be tempered. Moreover, our results implicate that positive effects of methylphenidate on math performance are in part due directly to effects on math ability and in part due to reductions in ADHD symptoms.

School-based sleep education program improves sleep and academic performance of school-age children

STUDY OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to develop and evaluate the effectiveness of a school-based sleep education program aimed at improving the sleep and academic performance of school-age children.

METHODS

Using a community-based participatory research approach, we created a school-based sleep education program, "Sleep for Success"™ (SFS), composed of four distinct modules that addressed the children, their family and community, the school staff, and decision makers within the school setting. Implementation was carried out in three elementary schools. Seventy-one students participated in the evaluation of the program. The effectiveness of the SFS program was evaluated using non-randomized controlled before-and-after study groups (intervention and control) assessed over two time points (pre- and post-program implementation). Before (baseline) and after implementation, sleep and academic performance were measured using actigraphy and report card marks, respectively.

RESULTS

In the intervention group, true sleep was extended by 18.2 min per night, sleep efficiency improved by 2.3%, and sleep latency was shortened by 2.3 min, and report card grades in mathematics and English improved significantly. No changes were noted in the control group.

CONCLUSION

Participation in the sleep education program was associated with significant improvements in children's sleep and academic performance.

Reinforcement and Stimulant Medication Ameliorate Deficient Response Inhibition in Children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

This study examined the degree to which reinforcement, stimulant medication, and their combination impact response inhibition in children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Across three studies, participants with ADHD (n = 111, 25 girls) and typically-developing (TD) controls (n = 33, 6 girls) completed a standard version of the stop signal task (SST) and/or a reinforcement-manipulation SST with performance-contingent points. In two of these studies, these tasks were performed under placebo or 0.3 and 0.6 mg/kg methylphenidate (MPH) conditions. Cross-study comparisons were conducted to test hypotheses regarding the separate and combined effects of reinforcement and methylphenidate on response inhibition among children with ADHD relative to TD controls. Baseline response inhibition was worse among children with ADHD compared to controls. MPH produced dose-related improvements in response inhibition in children with ADHD; compared to non-medicated TD controls, 0.3 mg/kg MPH normalized deficient response inhibition, and 0.6 mg/kg MPH resulted in better inhibition in children with ADHD. Reinforcement improved response inhibition to a greater extent for children with ADHD than for TD children, normalizing response inhibition. The combination of MPH and reinforcement improved response inhibition among children with ADHD compared to reinforcement alone and MPH alone, also resulting in normalization of response inhibition despite repeated task exposure. Deficient response inhibition commonly observed in children with ADHD is significantly improved with MPH and/or reinforcement, normalizing inhibition relative to TD children tested under standard conditions.

Impact of Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder on School Performance: What are the Effects of Medication?

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) affects an estimated 5-7 % of schoolchildren worldwide. School functioning and academic achievement are frequently impaired by ADHD and represent one of the main reasons children start ADHD medication. Multiple potential causal pathways exist between ADHD and impaired school performance. In this review, we decompose school performance into three components and assess the impact of ADHD and its treatments on academic performance (assessed by grade point average [GPA], time on-task, percentage of work completed as well as percent completed correctly), academic skills (as measured by achievement tests and cognitive measures), and academic enablers (such as study skills, motivation, engagement, classroom behavior and interpersonal skills). Most studies examined only the short-term effects of medication on school performance. In these, ADHD medications have been observed to improve some aspects of school performance, with the largest impact on measures of academic performance such as seatwork productivity and on-task performance. In a subset of children, these benefits may translate into detectable improvements in GPA and achievement testing. However, limited data exists to support whether these changes are sustained over years. Optimizing medication effects requires periodic reassessment of school performance, necessitating a collaborative effort involving patients, parents, school staff and prescribers. Even with systematic reassessment, behavioral-based treatments and additional school-based services may be needed to maximize academic performance for the many youth with ADHD and prominent impairments in school performance.

Sleep efficiency (but not sleep duration) of healthy school-age children is associated with grades in math and languages

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to examine the associations between objective measures of sleep duration and sleep efficiency with the grades obtained by healthy typically developing children in math, language, science, and art while controlling for the potential confounding effects of socioeconomic status (SES), age, and gender.

STUDY DESIGN

We studied healthy typically developing children between 7 and 11 years of age. Sleep was assessed for five week nights using actigraphy, and parents provided their child's most recent report card.

RESULTS

Higher sleep efficiency (but not sleep duration) was associated with better grades in math, English language, and French as a second language, above and beyond the contributions of age, gender, and SES.

CONCLUSION

Sleep efficiency, but not sleep duration, is associated with academic performance as measured by report-card grades in typically developing school-aged children. The integration of strategies to improve sleep efficiency might represent a successful approach for improving children's readiness and/or performance in math and languages.