Literature DB >> 17667479

Secondary evaluations of MTA 36-month outcomes: propensity score and growth mixture model analyses.

James M Swanson, Stephen P Hinshaw, L Eugene Arnold, Robert D Gibbons, Sue Marcus, Kwan Hur, Peter S Jensen, Benedetto Vitiello, Howard B Abikoff, Laurence L Greenhill, Lily Hechtman, William E Pelham, Karen C Wells, C Keith Conners, John S March, Glen R Elliott, Jeffery N Epstein, Kimberly Hoagwood, Betsy Hoza, Brooke S G Molina, Jeffrey H Newcorn, Joanne B Severe, Timothy Wigal.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate two hypotheses: that self-selection bias contributed to lack of medication advantage at the 36-month assessment of the Multimodal Treatment Study of Children With ADHD (MTA) and that overall improvement over time obscured treatment effects in subgroups with different outcome trajectories.
METHOD: Propensity score analyses, using baseline characteristics and severity of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms at follow-up, established five subgroups (quintiles) based on tendency to take medication at the 36-month assessment. Growth mixture model (GMM) analyses were performed to identify subgroups (classes) with different patterns of outcome over time.
RESULTS: All five propensity subgroups showed initial advantage of medication that disappeared by the 36-month assessment. GMM analyses identified heterogeneity of trajectories over time and three classes: class 1 (34% of the MTA sample) with initial small improvement followed by gradual improvement that produced significant medication effects; class 2 (52%) with initial large improvement maintained for 3 years and overrepresentation of cases treated with the MTA Medication Algorithm; and class 3 (14%) with initial large improvement followed by deterioration.
CONCLUSIONS: We failed to confirm the self-selection hypothesis. We found suggestive evidence of residual but not current benefits of assigned medication in class 2 and small current benefits of actual treatment with medication in class 1.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17667479     DOI: 10.1097/CHI.0b013e3180686d63

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry        ISSN: 0890-8567            Impact factor:   8.829


  42 in total

1.  Developmental progression to early adult binge drinking and marijuana use from worsening versus stable trajectories of adolescent attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder and delinquency.

Authors:  Andrea L Howard; Brooke S G Molina; James M Swanson; Stephen P Hinshaw; Katherine A Belendiuk; Seth C Harty; L Eugene Arnold; Howard B Abikoff; Lily Hechtman; Annamarie Stehli; Laurence L Greenhill; Jeffrey H Newcorn; Timothy Wigal
Journal:  Addiction       Date:  2015-03-24       Impact factor: 6.526

2.  Methods for testing theory and evaluating impact in randomized field trials: intent-to-treat analyses for integrating the perspectives of person, place, and time.

Authors:  C Hendricks Brown; Wei Wang; Sheppard G Kellam; Bengt O Muthén; Hanno Petras; Peter Toyinbo; Jeanne Poduska; Nicholas Ialongo; Peter A Wyman; Patricia Chamberlain; Zili Sloboda; David P MacKinnon; Amy Windham
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2008-01-22       Impact factor: 4.492

3.  Diagnosing and managing complicated ADHD.

Authors:  Robert L Findling; L Eugene Arnold; Laurence L Greenhill; Christopher J Kratochvil; James J McGough
Journal:  Prim Care Companion J Clin Psychiatry       Date:  2008

Review 4.  A clinical review of outcomes of the multimodal treatment study of children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (MTA).

Authors:  Desiree W Murray; L Eugene Arnold; Jim Swanson; Karen Wells; Karen Burns; Peter Jensen; Lily Hechtman; Natalya Paykina; Lauren Legato; Tara Strauss
Journal:  Curr Psychiatry Rep       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 5.285

5.  Three-year latent class trajectories of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms in a clinical sample not selected for ADHD.

Authors:  L Eugene Arnold; Stephen J Ganocy; Katherine Mount; Eric A Youngstrom; Thomas Frazier; Mary Fristad; Sarah M Horwitz; Boris Birmaher; Robert Findling; Robert A Kowatch; Christine Demeter; David Axelson; Mary Kay Gill; Linda Marsh
Journal:  J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry       Date:  2014-04-30       Impact factor: 8.829

6.  Do stimulants protect against psychiatric disorders in youth with ADHD? A 10-year follow-up study.

Authors:  Joseph Biederman; Michael C Monuteaux; Thomas Spencer; Timothy E Wilens; Stephen V Faraone
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 7.124

7.  Adolescent substance use in the multimodal treatment study of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (MTA) as a function of childhood ADHD, random assignment to childhood treatments, and subsequent medication.

Authors:  Brooke S G Molina; Stephen P Hinshaw; L Eugene Arnold; James M Swanson; William E Pelham; Lily Hechtman; Betsy Hoza; Jeffery N Epstein; Timothy Wigal; Howard B Abikoff; Laurence L Greenhill; Peter S Jensen; Karen C Wells; Benedetto Vitiello; Robert D Gibbons; Andrea Howard; Patricia R Houck; Kwan Hur; Bo Lu; Sue Marcus
Journal:  J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry       Date:  2013-02-08       Impact factor: 8.829

Review 8.  ADHD in children and adolescents.

Authors:  Daphne Keen; Irene Hadijikoumi
Journal:  BMJ Clin Evid       Date:  2008-10-02

9.  Multimodal treatments versus pharmacotherapy alone in children with psychiatric disorders: implications of access, effectiveness, and contextual treatment.

Authors:  Gloria Reeves; Bruno Anthony
Journal:  Paediatr Drugs       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 3.022

10.  Evaluating long-term effects of a psychiatric treatment using instrumental variable and matching approaches.

Authors:  Bo Lu; Sue Marcus
Journal:  Health Serv Outcomes Res Methodol       Date:  2012-10-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.