| Title |
Treatment outcomes after methylphenidate in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder treated with lisdexamfetamine dimesylate or atomoxetine
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s98498 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alain Joseph, Martin Cloutier, Annie Guérin, Roy Nitulescu, Vanja Sikirica |
| Abstract |
To compare treatment adherence, discontinuation, add-on, and daily average consumption (DACON) among adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder receiving second-line lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) or atomoxetine (ATX), following methylphenidate. A retrospective cohort study using US commercial claims databases (Q2/2009-Q3/2013). At month 12, the LDX cohort (N=2,718) had a higher adherence level (proportion of days covered: 0.48 versus 0.30, P<0.001) and was less likely to discontinue (Kaplan-Meier estimate: 63% versus 85%, P<0.001) than the ATX cohort (N=674). There were no statistical differences in treatment add-on rates between cohorts (Kaplan-Meier estimate: 26% versus 25%, P=0.297). The LDX cohort had a lower DACON (1.10 versus 1.31, P<0.001) and was less likely to have a DACON >1 (adjusted odds ratio: 0.20, 95% confidence interval: 0.15-0.25, P<0.001) than the ATX cohort. Adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder treated with LDX following methylphenidate had a higher treatment adherence and lower discontinuation and DACON relative to those treated with ATX following methylphenidate. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 37 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 22% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 10 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 16% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 14% |
| Psychology | 4 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 13 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 September 2019.
All research outputs
#7,960,512
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#580
of 1,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,424
of 312,601 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#25
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,757 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,601 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.