4.6 Article

Nonpharmacological Interventions for ADHD: Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of Randomized Controlled Trials of Dietary and Psychological Treatments

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY
卷 170, 期 3, 页码 275-289

出版社

AMER PSYCHIATRIC PUBLISHING, INC
DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2012.12070991

关键词

-

资金

  1. Shire
  2. Janssen-Cilag
  3. Qbtech
  4. Eli Lilly
  5. GlaxoSmithKline
  6. Genopharm
  7. UCB
  8. Lilly
  9. Novartis
  10. Medice
  11. Vifor
  12. Vifor Pharma
  13. German Research Foundation
  14. German Ministry of Education and Research
  15. European Union
  16. NIMH
  17. German Research Association
  18. Ministry of Research/Education (BMBF)
  19. Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (BfArM)
  20. Ferring
  21. Bristol-Myers Squibb/Otsuka
  22. BrainGain grant, NOW, Netherlands
  23. Brain Products GMBH
  24. U.K. National Health Service
  25. U.K. National Institute for Health Research
  26. European Union FP7 program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Nonpharmacological treatments are available for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), although their efficacy remains uncertain. The authors undertook meta-analyses of the efficacy of dietary (restricted elimination diets, artificial food color exclusions, and free fatty acid supplementation) and psychological (cognitive training, neurofeedback, and behavioral interventions) ADHD treatments. Method: Using a common systematic search and a rigorous coding and data extraction strategy across domains, the authors searched electronic databases to identify published randomized controlled trials that involved individuals who were diagnosed with ADHD (or who met a validated cutoff on a recognized rating scale) and that included an ADHD outcome. Results: Fifty-four of the 2,904 nonduplicate screened records were included in the analyses. Two different analyses were performed. When the outcome measure was based on ADHD assessments by raters closest to the therapeutic setting, all dietary (standardized mean differences=0.21-0.48) and psychological (standardized mean differences=0.40-0.64) treatments produced statistically significant effects: However, when the best probably blinded assessment was employed, effects remained significant for free fatty acid supplementation (standardized mean difference=0.16) and artificial food color exclusion (standardized mean difference=0.42) but were substantially attenuated to nonsignificant levels for other treatments. Conclusions: Free fatty acid supplementation produced small but significant reductions in ADHD symptoms even with probably blinded assessments, although the clinical significance of these effects remains to be determined. Artificial food color exclusion produced larger effects but often in individuals selected for food sensitivities. Better evidence for efficacy from blinded assessments is required for behavioral interventions, neurofeedback, cognitive training, and restricted elimination diets before they can be supported as treatments for core ADHD symptoms. (Am J Psychiatry 2013; 170:275-289)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据