Literature DB >> 28868642

Assessing risk of bias in randomized controlled trials of methylphenidate for children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

Raíssa Rodrigues-Tartari1, Walter Swardfager2,3,4, Giovanni A Salum5, Luís A Rohde5, Hugo Cogo-Moreira1.   

Abstract

To test how reliable the tool recommend by Cochrane Collaboration for assessing risk of bias systematic reviews of randomized clinical trials is in the context of methylphenidate for children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to evaluate a unidimensional model for the 7 indicators, applied to 184 Randomized Clinical Trial (RCTs) within a 2015 Cochrane systematic review titled "Methylphenidate for children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder." A unidimensional model resulted in excellent adequacy indices, but only 2 indicators had very high factor loadings and low measurement errors. In terms of content, the 7 indicators showed poor reliability (ω = 0.642); however, the set of indicators was precise in evaluating studies with a high amount of bias risk. The Cochrane model of risk of bias as it is, exhibited good fit indices but the majority of the items were not reliable to adequately capture risk of bias in the context of clinical trials of methylphenidate for ADHD.
Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ADHD; confirmatory factor analysis; meta-analysis; methylphenidate; risk of bias

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28868642      PMCID: PMC6877180          DOI: 10.1002/mpr.1586

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res        ISSN: 1049-8931            Impact factor:   4.035


  8 in total

Review 1.  Systematic reviews in health care: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials.

Authors:  P Jüni; D G Altman; M Egger
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-07-07

2.  Scale Reliability, Cronbach's Coefficient Alpha, and Violations of Essential Tau-Equivalence with Fixed Congeneric Components.

Authors:  T Raykov
Journal:  Multivariate Behav Res       Date:  1997-10-01       Impact factor: 5.923

3.  Annual research review: A meta-analysis of the worldwide prevalence of mental disorders in children and adolescents.

Authors:  Guilherme V Polanczyk; Giovanni A Salum; Luisa S Sugaya; Arthur Caye; Luis A Rohde
Journal:  J Child Psychol Psychiatry       Date:  2015-02-03       Impact factor: 8.982

4.  Thanks coefficient alpha, we'll take it from here.

Authors:  Daniel McNeish
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2017-05-29

5.  Reliability estimation in a multilevel confirmatory factor analysis framework.

Authors:  G John Geldhof; Kristopher J Preacher; Michael J Zyphur
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2013-05-06

Review 6.  There were large discrepancies in risk of bias tool judgments when a randomized controlled trial appeared in more than one systematic review.

Authors:  Vanessa M B Jordan; Sarah F Lensen; Cynthia M Farquhar
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2016-09-10       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 7.  Long-Term Efficacy of Methylphenidate Immediate-Release for the Treatment of Childhood ADHD.

Authors:  Carlos Renato Moreira Maia; Samuele Cortese; Arthur Caye; Thomas Kuhn Deakin; Guilherme Vanoni Polanczyk; Carísi Anne Polanczyk; Luis Augusto Paim Rohde
Journal:  J Atten Disord       Date:  2016-07-28       Impact factor: 3.256

Review 8.  Methylphenidate for children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

Authors:  Ole Jakob Storebø; Erica Ramstad; Helle B Krogh; Trine Danvad Nilausen; Maria Skoog; Mathilde Holmskov; Susanne Rosendal; Camilla Groth; Frederik L Magnusson; Carlos R Moreira-Maia; Donna Gillies; Kirsten Buch Rasmussen; Dorothy Gauci; Morris Zwi; Richard Kirubakaran; Bente Forsbøl; Erik Simonsen; Christian Gluud
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-11-25
  8 in total
  5 in total

1.  Methodological concerns with network meta-analysis on drugs for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

Authors:  Erlend Glasø Faltinsen; Ole Jakob Storebø; Christian Gluud
Journal:  Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry       Date:  2018-05-09       Impact factor: 4.785

2.  Assessing Risk of Bias in Randomized Controlled Trials for Autism Spectrum Disorder.

Authors:  Paola Matiko Martins Okuda; Cheryl Klaiman; Jessica Bradshaw; Morganne Reid; Hugo Cogo-Moreira
Journal:  Front Psychiatry       Date:  2017-11-29       Impact factor: 4.157

3.  Revictimization as a high-risk factor for development of posttraumatic stress disorder: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Giuliana C Cividanes; Andrea F Mello; Marcelo F Mello
Journal:  Braz J Psychiatry       Date:  2018-10-11       Impact factor: 2.697

4.  Risk of Bias in Randomized Clinical Trials on Psychological Therapies for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder in Adults.

Authors:  Juliana Martins Scalabrin; Marcelo F Mello; Walter Swardfager; Hugo Cogo-Moreira
Journal:  Chronic Stress (Thousand Oaks)       Date:  2018-05-31

5.  Risk of bias judgments for random sequence generation in Cochrane systematic reviews were frequently not in line with Cochrane Handbook.

Authors:  Ognjen Barcot; Matija Boric; Tina Poklepovic Pericic; Marija Cavar; Svjetlana Dosenovic; Ivana Vuka; Livia Puljak
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2019-08-05       Impact factor: 4.615

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.