Kollins 2021.
Study characteristics | ||
Methods | A 1‐week parallel‐trial with 2 arms:
|
|
Participants | Number of participants screened: 178 (155 participants included in open‐label phase) Number of participants included: 150 randomised (92 male, 58 female) Number of participants followed up: 149 Number of withdrawals: 1 lost to follow‐up Diagnosis of ADHD: DSM‐5 (percentage of combined (88%), hyperactive‐impulsive (0%) and inattentive (12%)) Age: mean 9.6 (range 6‐12) IQ: not stated MPH‐naive: 89 (59.3%) Ethnicity: 76 white, 56 black/African American, 7 Asian, 10 multiracial, 1 other Country: USA Setting: outpatient clinic, laboratory classroom Comorbidity: some were specified as exclusion criteria Comedication: not stated Additional sociodemographics: none Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
|
|
Interventions | Participants were randomly assigned to receive either their optimised dose of SDX/d‐MPH (ER) or placebo for 7 days Number randomised to each group: MPH 74, placebo 76 Mean medication dosage: not stated Administration schedule: the appropriate blinded treatment was taken at home, once daily in the morning, on days 22–27 Duration (of (each) medication): 7 days Washout before trial initiation: 2 days Titration period: 3 weeks before randomisation Treatment compliance: not stated |
|
Outcomes |
ADHD symptoms
Serious AEs
General behavioral
Non‐serious AEs
|
|
Notes | Sample calculation: yes (126) Ethics approval: the trial was approved by an Institutional Review Board. Comments from trial authors
Key conclusion of trial authors
Exclusion of MPH non‐responders/children who have previously experienced AEs while taking MPH: yes Any withdrawals due to AEs: no Funding source: clinical research was funded by KemPharm, Inc. Funding for editorial and writing assistance in the form of proofreading, copyediting, and fact‐checking was provided by Corium, Inc Supplemental information regarding the risk of bias assessment was requested through personal email correspondence with the authors in July 2022 but no answer was received. |
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | No information about sequence generation available |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | No information about method of allocation concealment available |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Randomisation was stratified by trial site. Neither the participant, the investigator, nor the sponsor knew a given participant’s treatment assignment. The appropriate blinded treatment was taken at home, once daily in the morning, on days 22–27 |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Randomisation was stratified by trial site. Neither the participant, the investigator, nor the sponsor knew a given participant’s treatment assignment. The appropriate blinded treatment was taken at home, once daily in the morning, on days 22–27 |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Efficacy analyses were conducted in the ITT population Selection bias (e.g. titration after randomisation → exclusion of MPH non‐responders or placebo responders): no |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | No indication of selective reporting, all outcomes are reported |