Solent NHS Trust

BACKGROUND: Misconceptions about ADHD stigmatize affected people, reduce credibility of providers, and prevent/delay treatment. To challenge misconceptions, we curated findings with strong evidence base. METHODS: We reviewed studies with more than 2000 participants or meta-analyses from five or more studies or 2000 or more participants. We excluded meta-analyses that did not assess publication bias, except for meta-analyses of prevalence. For network meta-analyses we required comparison adjusted funnel plots. We excluded treatment studies with waiting-list or treatment as usual controls. From this literature, we extracted evidence-based assertions about the disorder. RESULTS: We generated 208 empirically supported statements about ADHD. The status of the included statements as empirically supported is approved by 80 authors from 27 countries and 6 continents. The contents of the manuscript are endorsed by 366 people who have read this document and agree with its contents. CONCLUSIONS: Many findings in ADHD are supported by meta-analysis. These allow for firm statements about the nature, course, outcome causes, and treatments for disorders that are useful for reducing misconceptions and stigma.

BACKGROUND: The benefits and safety of medications for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) remain controversial, and guidelines are inconsistent on which medications are preferred across different age groups. We aimed to estimate the comparative efficacy and tolerability of oral medications for ADHD in children, adolescents, and adults. METHODS: We did a literature search for published and unpublished double-blind randomised controlled trials comparing amphetamines (including lisdexamfetamine), atomoxetine, bupropion, clonidine, guanfacine, methylphenidate, and modafinil with each other or placebo. We systematically contacted study authors and drug manufacturers for additional information. Primary outcomes were efficacy (change in severity of ADHD core symptoms based on teachers' and clinicians' ratings) and tolerability (proportion of patients who dropped out of studies because of side-effects) at timepoints closest to 12 weeks, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks. We estimated summary odds ratios (ORs) and standardised mean differences (SMDs) using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects. We assessed the risk of bias of individual studies with the Cochrane risk of bias tool and confidence of estimates with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach for network meta-analyses. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42014008976. FINDINGS: 133 double-blind randomised controlled trials (81 in children and adolescents, 51 in adults, and one in both) were included. The analysis of efficacy closest to 12 weeks was based on 10 068 children and adolescents and 8131 adults; the analysis of tolerability was based on 11 018 children and adolescents and 5362 adults. The confidence of estimates varied from high or moderate (for some comparisons) to low or very low (for most indirect comparisons). For ADHD core symptoms rated by clinicians in children and adolescents closest to 12 weeks, all included drugs were superior to placebo (eg, SMD -1·02, 95% CI -1·19 to -0·85 for amphetamines, -0·78, -0·93 to -0·62 for methylphenidate, -0·56, -0·66 to -0·45 for atomoxetine). By contrast, for available comparisons based on teachers' ratings, only methylphenidate (SMD -0·82, 95% CI -1·16 to -0·48) and modafinil (-0·76, -1·15 to -0·37) were more efficacious than placebo. In adults (clinicians' ratings), amphetamines (SMD -0·79, 95% CI -0·99 to -0·58), methylphenidate (-0·49, -0·64 to -0·35), bupropion (-0·46, -0·85 to -0·07), and atomoxetine (-0·45, -0·58 to -0·32), but not modafinil (0·16, -0·28 to 0·59), were better than placebo. With respect to tolerability, amphetamines were inferior to placebo in both children and adolescents (odds ratio [OR] 2·30, 95% CI 1·36-3·89) and adults (3·26, 1·54-6·92); guanfacine was inferior to placebo in children and adolescents only (2·64, 1·20-5·81); and atomoxetine (2·33, 1·28-4·25), methylphenidate (2·39, 1·40-4·08), and modafinil (4·01, 1·42-11·33) were less well tolerated than placebo in adults only. In head-to-head comparisons, only differences in efficacy (clinicians' ratings) were found, favouring amphetamines over modafinil, atomoxetine, and methylphenidate in both children and adolescents (SMDs -0·46 to -0·24) and adults (-0·94 to -0·29). We did not find sufficient data for the 26-week and 52-week timepoints. INTERPRETATION: Our findings represent the most comprehensive available evidence base to inform patients, families, clinicians, guideline developers, and policymakers on the choice of ADHD medications across age groups. Taking into account both efficacy and safety, evidence from this meta-analysis supports methylphenidate in children and adolescents, and amphetamines in adults, as preferred first-choice medications for the short-term treatment of ADHD. New research should be funded urgently to assess long-term effects of these drugs. FUNDING: Stichting Eunethydis (European Network for Hyperkinetic Disorders), and the UK National Institute for Health Research Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre.

Previous research has shown a relationship between financial difficulties and poor mental health in students, but most research is cross-sectional. To examine longitudinal relationships over time between financial variables and mental health in students. A national sample of 454 first year British undergraduate students completed measures of mental health and financial variables at up to four time points across a year. Cross-sectional relationships were found between poorer mental health and female gender, having a disability and non-white ethnicity. Greater financial difficulties predicted greater depression and stress cross-sectionally, and also predicted poorer anxiety, global mental health and alcohol dependence over time. Depression worsened over time for those who had considered abandoning studies or not coming to university for financial reasons, and there were effects for how students viewed their student loan. Anxiety and alcohol dependence also predicted worsening financial situation suggesting a bi-directional relationship. Financial difficulties appear to lead to poor mental health in students with the possibility of a vicious cycle occurring.

Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS), including transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), is a potentially effective treatment strategy for a number of mental conditions. However, no quantitative evidence synthesis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of TMS or tDCS using the same criteria including several mental conditions is available. Based on 208 RCTs identified in a systematic review, we conducted a series of random effects meta-analyses to assess the efficacy of NIBS, compared to sham, for core symptoms and cognitive functioning within a broad range of mental conditions. Outcomes included changes in core symptom severity and cognitive functioning from pre- to post-treatment. We found significant positive effects for several outcomes without significant heterogeneity including TMS for symptoms of generalized anxiety disorder (SMD = -1.8 (95% CI: -2.6 to -1), and tDCS for symptoms of substance use disorder (-0.73, -1.00 to -0.46). There was also significant effects for TMS in obsessive-compulsive disorder (-0.66, -0.91 to -0.41) and unipolar depression symptoms (-0.60, -0.78 to -0.42) but with significant heterogeneity. However, subgroup analyses based on stimulation site and number of treatment sessions revealed evidence of positive effects, without significant heterogeneity, for specific TMS stimulation protocols. For neurocognitive outcomes, there was only significant evidence, without significant heterogeneity, for tDCS for improving attention (-0.3, -0.55 to -0.05) and working memory (-0.38, -0.74 to -0.03) in individuals with schizophrenia. We concluded that TMS and tDCS can benefit individuals with a variety of mental conditions, significantly improving clinical dimensions, including cognitive deficits in schizophrenia which are poorly responsive to pharmacotherapy.

Purpose Previous cross-sectional research has examined the effect of loneliness on mental health. The purpose of this paper is to examine longitudinal relationships in students. Design/methodology/approach A total of 454 British undergraduate students completed measures of loneliness and mental health at four time points. Findings After controlling for demographics and baseline mental health, greater loneliness predicted greater anxiety, stress, depression and general mental health over time. There was no evidence that mental health problems increased loneliness over time. There was no relationship with alcohol problems. Baseline loneliness predicted greater eating disorder risk at follow-up and vice versa. Research limitations/implications This study is limited by a relatively small and heavily female sample. Practical implications Social and psychological interventions to reduce loneliness in university settings may improve mental health. Social implications Universities should consider organising social activities to mitigate feelings of loneliness in students. Originality/value This study adds to the literature as a longitudinal analysis showing that loneliness exacerbates poor mental health over time. This also adds to the literature for students specifically, and suggests a possible bi-directional relationship between eating disorders and loneliness for the first time.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically assess credibility and certainty of associations between cannabis, cannabinoids, and cannabis based medicines and human health, from observational studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs). DESIGN: Umbrella review. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, PsychInfo, Embase, up to 9 February 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Systematic reviews with meta-analyses of observational studies and RCTs that have reported on the efficacy and safety of cannabis, cannabinoids, or cannabis based medicines were included. Credibility was graded according to convincing, highly suggestive, suggestive, weak, or not significant (observational evidence), and by GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations) (RCTs). Quality was assessed with AMSTAR 2 (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2). Sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: 101 meta-analyses were included (observational=50, RCTs=51) (AMSTAR 2 high 33, moderate 31, low 32, or critically low 5). From RCTs supported by high to moderate certainty, cannabis based medicines increased adverse events related to the central nervous system (equivalent odds ratio 2.84 (95% confidence interval 2.16 to 3.73)), psychological effects (3.07 (1.79 to 5.26)), and vision (3.00 (1.79 to 5.03)) in people with mixed conditions (GRADE=high), improved nausea/vomit, pain, spasticity, but increased psychiatric, gastrointestinal adverse events, and somnolence among others (GRADE=moderate). Cannabidiol improved 50% reduction of seizures (0.59 (0.38 to 0.92)) and seizure events (0.59 (0.36 to 0.96)) (GRADE=high), but increased pneumonia, gastrointestinal adverse events, and somnolence (GRADE=moderate). For chronic pain, cannabis based medicines or cannabinoids reduced pain by 30% (0.59 (0.37 to 0.93), GRADE=high), across different conditions (n=7), but increased psychological distress. For epilepsy, cannabidiol increased risk of diarrhoea (2.25 (1.33 to 3.81)), had no effect on sleep disruption (GRADE=high), reduced seizures across different populations and measures (n=7), improved global impression (n=2), quality of life, and increased risk of somnolence (GRADE=moderate). In the general population, cannabis worsened positive psychotic symptoms (5.21 (3.36 to 8.01)) and total psychiatric symptoms (7.49 (5.31 to 10.42)) (GRADE=high), negative psychotic symptoms, and cognition (n=11) (GRADE=moderate). In healthy people, cannabinoids improved pain threshold (0.74 (0.59 to 0.91)), unpleasantness (0.60 (0.41 to 0.88)) (GRADE=high). For inflammatory bowel disease, cannabinoids improved quality of life (0.34 (0.22 to 0.53) (GRADE=high). For multiple sclerosis, cannabinoids improved spasticity, pain, but increased risk of dizziness, dry mouth, nausea, somnolence (GRADE=moderate). For cancer, cannabinoids improved sleep disruption, but had gastrointestinal adverse events (n=2) (GRADE=moderate). Cannabis based medicines, cannabis, and cannabinoids resulted in poor tolerability across various conditions (GRADE=moderate). Evidence was convincing from observational studies (main and sensitivity analyses) in pregnant women, small for gestational age (1.61 (1.41 to 1.83)), low birth weight (1.43 (1.27 to 1.62)); in drivers, car crash (1.27 (1.21 to 1.34)); and in the general population, psychosis (1.71 (1.47 to 2.00)). Harmful effects were noted for additional neonatal outcomes, outcomes related to car crash, outcomes in the general population including psychotic symptoms, suicide attempt, depression, and mania, and impaired cognition in healthy cannabis users (all suggestive to highly suggestive). CONCLUSIONS: Convincing or converging evidence supports avoidance of cannabis during adolescence and early adulthood, in people prone to or with mental health disorders, in pregnancy and before and while driving. Cannabidiol is effective in people with epilepsy. Cannabis based medicines are effective in people with multiple sclerosis, chronic pain, inflammatory bowel disease, and in palliative medicine but not without adverse events. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018093045. FUNDING: None.

When species occupy habitats that vary in quality, choice of habitat can be critical in determining individual fitness. In most migratory species, juveniles migrate independently of their parents and must therefore choose both breeding and winter habitats. Using a unique dataset of marked black-tailed godwits (Limosa limosa islandica) tracked throughout their migratory range, combined with analyses of stable carbon isotope ratios, we show that those individuals that occupy higher quality breeding sites also use higher quality winter sites. This seasonal matching can severely inflate inequalities in individual fitness. This population has expanded over the last century into poorer quality breeding and winter habitats and, across the whole population; individual birds tend to occupy either novel or traditional sites in both seasons. Winter and breeding season habitat selection are thus strongly linked throughout this population; these links have profound implications for a wide range of population and evolutionary processes. As adult godwits are highly philopatric, the initial choice of winter habitat by juveniles will be critical in determining future survival, timing of migration and breeding success.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of computer-assisted forms of cognitive-behavior therapy for major depressive disorder (MDD) and examine the role of clinician support and other factors that might affect outcomes. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Scopus from their beginnings to July 18, 2016. Keywords were "randomized, controlled trials of computer-assisted cognitive-behavior therapy for depression" and "randomized, controlled trials of mobile apps for cognitive-behavior therapy of depression." STUDY SELECTION: Of 223 studies identified in the search, 183 were excluded yielding a sample of 40 randomized, controlled investigations of computer-assisted cognitive-behavior therapy (CCBT) for depression. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were abstracted independently by two authors, and consensus was reached by discussion with a third author. RESULTS: The overall mean effect size for CCBT compared to control conditions was g = 0.502, a moderately large effect. Studies that provided support from a clinician or other person yielded significantly larger effects (g = 0.673) than studies in which no support was provided (g = 0.239). Completion rate and study setting also influenced outcomes. Lower mean effect sizes were observed in studies with lower completion rates and in studies conducted in primary care practices. CONCLUSIONS: CCBT with a modest amount of support from a clinician or other helping person was found to be efficacious with relatively large mean effect sizes on measures of depressive symptoms. Self-guided CCBT for depression was considerably less effective. Future research should focus on enhancing the implementation of CCBT, including evaluating the amount and type of support needed for effective delivery, methods to improve engagement with computer-assisted therapies, and ways to improve treatment outcome in primary care settings.

In this clinical review we summarise what in our view have been some the most important advances in the past two decades, in terms of diagnostic definition, epidemiology, genetics and environmental causes, neuroimaging/cognition and treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), including: (1) the most recent changes to the diagnostic criteria in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and International Classification of Diseases; (2) meta-analytic evidence showing that, after accounting for diagnostic methods, the rates of ADHD are fairly consistent across Western countries; (3) the recent finding of the first genome-wide significant risk loci for ADHD; (4) the paradigm shift in the pathophysiological conceptualisation of ADHD from alterations in individual brain regions to a complex dysfunction in brain networks; (5) evidence supporting the short-term efficacy of ADHD pharmacological treatments, with a different profile of efficacy and tolerability in children/adolescents versus adults; (6) a series of meta-analyses showing that, while non-pharmacological treatment may not be effective to target ADHD core symptoms, some of them effectively address ADHD-related impairments (such as oppositional behaviours for parent training and working memory deficits for cognitive training). We also discuss key priorities for future research in each of these areas of investigation. Overall, while many research questions have been answered, many others need to be addressed. Strengthening multidisciplinary collaborations, relying on large data sets in the spirit of Open Science and supporting research in less advantaged countries will be key to face the challenges ahead.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a meta-analysis of resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (R-fMRI) studies in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and in adults with ADHD to assess spatial convergence of findings from available studies. METHOD: Based on a preregistered protocol in PROSPERO (CRD42019119553), a large set of databases were searched up to April 9, 2019, with no language or article type restrictions. Study authors were systematically contacted for additional unpublished information/data. Resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging studies using seed-based connectivity (SBC) or any other method (non-SBC) reporting whole-brain results of group comparisons between participants with ADHD and typically developing controls were eligible. Voxelwise meta-analysis via activation likelihood estimation with cluster-level familywise error (voxel-level: p < .001; cluster-level: p < .05) was used. RESULTS: Thirty studies (18 SBC and 12 non-SBC), comprising 1,978 participants (1,094 with ADHD; 884 controls) were retained. The meta-analysis focused on SBC studies found no significant spatial convergence of ADHD-related hyperconnectivity or hypoconnectivity across studies. This nonsignificant finding remained after integrating 12 non-SBC studies into the main analysis and in sensitivity analyses limited to studies including only children or only non-medication-naïve patients. CONCLUSION: The lack of significant spatial convergence may be accounted for by heterogeneity in study participants, experimental procedures, and analytic flexibility as well as in ADHD pathophysiology. Alongside other neuroimaging meta-analyses in other psychiatric conditions, the present results should inform the conduct and publication of future neuroimaging studies of psychiatric disorders.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationships between psychological and physiologic measures of stress, mood, and gestational age at delivery and preterm birth. METHODS: This prospective cohort study recruited healthy women in the early second trimester who were 18-45 years of age. Validated psychological measures of perceived stress, depressive symptoms, and anxiety were completed at 16, 22, 28, 34, and 40 weeks of gestation. Cortisol concentration was measured in maternal hair at 16, 28, and 40 weeks of gestation to approximate first-, second-, and third-trimester levels of physiologic stress. Statistical methods included: analyses of variance, t tests, χ, Pearson correlations, regression modeling, and mediation analysis as appropriate. Hair cortisol concentrations were natural log-transformed to normalize values. RESULTS: Eleven (12%) of the 90 included women had a spontaneous preterm birth or preterm premature rupture of membranes. Perceived stress at 16 weeks of gestation correlated with both second-trimester cortisol concentration (r=0.28, P=.007) and earlier gestational age at delivery (r=-0.30, P<.01). Gestational age at delivery was also negatively correlated with cortisol concentration in the second trimester (r=-0.25, P=.02) and second-trimester cortisol concentration was higher in preterm- (2.7 ± 0.4 log-transformed pg/mg) compared with term- (2.0 ± 0.7 log-transformed pg/mg, P<.001) delivered women. Using mediation statistics, the association between the psychological measure, the physiologic measure, and gestational age at delivery was mainly driven by increased physiologic stress (hair cortisol concentration) in the second trimester (difference in coefficients [standard error]=-0.05 [0.02]). CONCLUSION: Higher perceived stress in the second trimester is associated with both elevated second-trimester hair cortisol concentration and gestational age at delivery. Physiologic measure of stress in the second trimester appears most strongly associated with preterm birth. Identification and amelioration of early pregnancy stressors may attenuate physiologic stress and ultimately affect preterm birth.

ADHD is the most common neurodevelopmental disorder presenting to child and adolescent mental health, paediatric, and primary care services. Timely and effective interventions to address core ADHD symptoms and co-occurring problems are a high priority for healthcare and society more widely. While much research has reported on the benefits and adverse effects of different interventions for ADHD, these individual research reports and the reviews, meta-analyses and guidelines summarizing their findings are sometimes inconsistent and difficult to interpret. We have summarized the current evidence and identified several methodological issues and gaps in the current evidence that we believe are important for clinicians to consider when evaluating the evidence and making treatment decisions. These include understanding potential impact of bias such as inadequate blinding and selection bias on study outcomes; the relative lack of high-quality data comparing different treatments and assessing long-term effectiveness, adverse effects and safety for both pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments; and the problems associated with observational studies, including those based on large national registries and comparing treatments with each other. We highlight key similarities across current international clinical guidelines and discuss the reasons for divergence where these occur. We discuss the integration of these different perspective into a framework for person/family-centered evidence-based practice approach to care that aims to achieve optimal outcomes that prioritize individual strengths and impairments, as well as the personal treatment targets of children and their families. Finally, we consider how access to care for this common and impairing disorder can be improved in different healthcare systems.

Top-tier evidence on the safety/tolerability of 80 medications in children/adolescents with mental disorders has recently been reviewed in this jour-nal. To guide clinical practice, such data must be combined with evidence on efficacy and acceptability. Besides medications, psychosocial inter-ventions and brain stimulation techniques are treatment options for children/adolescents with mental disorders. For this umbrella review, we systematically searched network meta-analyses (NMAs) and meta-analyses (MAs) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating 48 medications, 20 psychosocial interventions, and four brain stimulation techniques in children/adolescents with 52 different mental disorders or groups of mental disorders, reporting on 20 different efficacy/acceptability outcomes. Co-primary outcomes were disease-specific symptom reduction and all-cause discontinuation ("acceptability"). We included 14 NMAs and 90 MAs, reporting on 15 mental disorders or groups of mental disorders. Overall, 21 medications outperformed placebo regarding the co-primary outcomes, and three psychosocial interventions did so (while seven outperformed waiting list/no treatment). Based on the meta-analytic evidence, the most convincing efficacy profile emerged for amphetamines, methylphenidate and, to a smaller extent, behavioral therapy in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder; aripiprazole, risperidone and several psychosocial interventions in autism; risperidone and behavioral interventions in disruptive behavior disorders; several antipsychotics in schizophrenia spectrum disorders; fluoxetine, the combination of fluoxetine and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), and interpersonal therapy in depression; aripiprazole in mania; fluoxetine and group CBT in anxiety disorders; fluoxetine/selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, CBT, and behavioral therapy with exposure and response prevention in obsessive-compulsive disorder; CBT in post-traumatic stress disorder; imipramine and alarm behavioral intervention in enuresis; behavioral therapy in encopresis; and family therapy in anorexia nervosa. Results from this umbrella review of interventions for mental disorders in children/adolescents provide evidence-based information for clinical decision making.

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is characterised by a persistent and impairing pattern of inattention and/or hyperactivity/impulsivity and it is one of the most common neuropsychiatric conditions. Evidence about interventions of adults with ADHD is growing rapidly and clinicians need a reliable summary of all the best available information in order to better inform their daily practice. We searched MEDLINE, PubMed, PsycINFO and Cochrane databases until 31 May 2016 for systematic reviews about pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments in adults with ADHD and carried out a meta-review to address clinically relevant questions. We identified a total of 40 papers. Psychostimulants-such as methylphenidate, dexamphetamine, mixed amphetamine salts and lisdexamfetamine-and non-psychostimulants-such as atomoxetine-were the most studied agents. Overall, pharmacological treatments were significantly more efficacious than placebo (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.45, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.52), albeit less well accepted (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.36) and tolerated (OR 2.29, 95% CI 1.97 to 2.66). The effects of pharmacological treatment for individuals with co-occurring ADHD and substance use disorder are still uncertain. The evidence for the efficacy and effectiveness of non-pharmacological treatments of ADHD in adults, as well as the combination of pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies, is only preliminary. In conclusion, while available evidence addressed mainly the efficacy and tolerability of psychostimulants and non-psychostimulants for ADHD core symptoms in the short term, we still need further empirical support for the non-pharmacological and multimodal treatments. A comprehensive evidence-informed hierarchy of ADHD drugs based on their efficacy and tolerability is not yet available but it should be the next research priority in the field.

Background Sleep problems are common and impairing in individuals with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). Evidence synthesis including both subjective (ie, measured with questionnaires) and objective (ie, quantified with neurophysiological tools) sleep alterations in youth with ASD is currently lacking. Objective We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of subjective and objective studies sleep studies in youth with ASD. Methods We searched the following electronic databases with no language, date or type of document restriction up to 23 May 2018: PubMed, PsycInfo, Embase+Embase Classic, Ovid Medline and Web of Knowledge. Random-effects models were used. Heterogeneity was assessed with Cochran’s Q and I 2 statistics. Publication (small studies) bias was assessed with final plots and the Egger’s test. Study quality was evaluated with the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. Analyses were conducted using Review Manager and Comprehensive Meta-Analysis. Findings From a pool of 3359 non-duplicate potentially relevant references, 47 datasets were included in the meta-analyses. Subjective and objective sleep outcome measures were extracted from 37 and 15 studies, respectively. Only five studies were based on comorbidity free, medication-naïve participants. Compared with typically developing controls, youth with ASD significantly differed in 10/14 subjective parameters and in 7/14 objective sleep parameters. The average quality score in the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was 5.9/9. Discussion and clinical implications A number of subjective and, to a less extent, objective sleep alterations might characterise youth with ASD, but future studies should assess the impact of pharmacological treatment and psychiatric comorbidities.

BACKGROUND: Evidence increasingly suggests that ASD manifests differently in females than males. Previous reviews investigating sex/gender differences in social interaction and social communication have focused at the level of broad constructs (e.g. comparing algorithm scores from pre-existing diagnostic instruments) and have typically reported no significant differences between males and females. However, a number of individual studies have found sex/gender differences in narrow construct domains. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and random effects model meta-analyses (in January 2019 and updated January 2020) that investigated sex/gender differences in narrow construct measures of social communication and interaction in autistic and nonautistic children and adolescents, and adults. Study quality was appraised using the Appraisal Tool for Cross-Sectional Studies (AXIS, BMJ Open, 6, 2016, 1). RESULTS: Across 16 studies (including 2,730 participants), the analysis found that female (vs. male) individuals with ASD had significantly better social interaction and social communication skills (SMD = 0.39, p < .001), which was reflective of a similar sex/gender profile in nonautistic individuals (SMD = 0.35, p < .001). Nonautistic males had significantly better social interaction and communication than males with ASD (SMD = 0.77, p < .001). Nonautistic females also had significantly better social interaction and communication than females with ASD (SMD = 0.72, p <.001). Nonautistic males had better social interaction and communication than females with ASD, though this difference was not significant (SMD = 0.30, p = .07). CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis highlighted important sex/gender differences in social interaction and communication for individuals with ASD, likely not captured by pre-existing diagnostic instruments, which potentially contribute to the under recognition of autism in females, and may need to be reflected in the diagnostic process.

BACKGROUND: Diffusion tensor imaging studies have shown atypical fractional anisotropy (FA) in individuals with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), albeit with conflicting results. We performed meta-analyses of whole-brain voxel-based analyses (WBVBA) and tract-based spatial statistics (TBSS) studies in ADHD, along with a qualitative review of TBSS studies addressing the issue of head motion, which may bias results. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search (last search on April 1st, 2016) to identify studies comparing FA values between individuals with ADHD and typically developing (TD) participants. Signed differential mapping was used to compute effect sizes and integrate WBVBA and TBSS studies, respectively. TBSS datasets reporting no between-group motion differences were identified. RESULTS: We identified 14 WBVBA (ADHDn = 314, TDn = 278) and 13 TBSS datasets (ADHDn = 557, TDn = 568). WBVBA meta-analysis showed both significantly lower and higher FA values in individuals with ADHD; TBSS meta-analysis showed significantly lower FA in ADHD compared with TD in four clusters: two in the corpus callosum (isthmus and posterior midbody), one in right inferior fronto-occipital fasciculus, and one in left inferior longitudinal fasciculus. However, four of six datasets confirming no group-differences in motion showed no significant between-group FA differences. CONCLUSIONS: A growing diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) literature (total N = 1,717) and a plethora of apparent findings suggest atypical interhemispheric connection in ADHD. However, FA results in ADHD should be considered with caution, since many studies did not examine potential group differences in head motion, and most of the studies reporting no difference in motion showed no significant results. Future studies should address head motion as a priority and assure that groups do not differ in head motion.

A compactação do solo é um dos principais fatores responsáveis pela queda da produtividade das culturas agrícolas. Por isso, o impacto causado pelo pisoteio bovino sobre o solo e os conseqüentes reflexos nos atributos físicos densidade do solo, porosidade do solo, resistência mecânica à penetração e infiltração de água no solo, em área manejada sob sistema integração lavoura-pecuária, foram investigados em experimento de campo, no município de Jari, na região do Planalto Médio do Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil. Foram avaliados três sistemas de manejo da pastagem de inverno (aveia-preta, Avena strigosa Schreber + azevém, Lolium multiflorum Lam.), caracterizados pela freqüência de pastejo: (1) Sem Pastejo (SP), (2) Pastejo a cada 28 dias (P28) e (3) Pastejo a cada 14 dias (P14). Além disso, foi avaliada a influência da cultura de verão, soja [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] ou milho (Zea mays L.), em rotação com as pastagens de inverno, em amenizar ou agravar a ação compactadora do pisoteio bovino. A compactação do solo, avaliada pela sua densidade, concentrou-se na camada de 0-0,05 m de profundidade, porém houve redução de sua macroporosidade até a camada de 0,10-0,15 m, no sistema com a maior freqüência de pastejo (P14). A resistência mecânica do solo à penetração atingiu valores de 2,61 e 2,49 MPa nos tratamentos P14 e P28, respectivamente, nas profundidades de 0,05 e 0,08 m, enquanto as áreas que não foram pastejadas mantiveram valores inferiores a 1,66 MPa. A taxa de infiltração de água no solo foi alterada significativamente pelo pisoteio bovino e pela cultura de verão antecedente. Com a cultura de milho, o solo mostrou-se menos sensível ao pisoteio bovino, ao passo que com a cultura de soja na maior freqüência de pastejo (P14) a taxa de infiltração de água no solo foi reduzida. A cultura de soja proporcionou os maiores valores de macroporosidade nas camadas avaliadas e, quando conjugada à menor freqüência de pastejo (P28) ou à ausência de pastejo (SP), observaram-se as maiores taxas de infiltração de água no solo.

Neurodevelopmental disorders - including attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism spectrum disorder, communication disorders, intellectual disability, motor disorders, specific learning disorders, and tic disorders - manifest themselves early in development. Valid, reliable and broadly usable biomarkers supporting a timely diagnosis of these disorders would be highly relevant from a clinical and public health standpoint. We conducted the first systematic review of studies on candidate diagnostic biomarkers for these disorders in children and adolescents. We searched Medline and Embase + Embase Classic with terms relating to biomarkers until April 6, 2022, and conducted additional targeted searches for genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and neuroimaging or neurophysiological studies carried out by international consortia. We considered a candidate biomarker as promising if it was reported in at least two independent studies providing evidence of sensitivity and specificity of at least 80%. After screening 10,625 references, we retained 780 studies (374 biochemical, 203 neuroimaging, 133 neurophysiological and 65 neuropsychological studies, and five GWAS), including a total of approximately 120,000 cases and 176,000 controls. While the majority of the studies focused simply on associations, we could not find any biomarker for which there was evidence - from two or more studies from independent research groups, with results going into the same direction - of specificity and sensitivity of at least 80%. Other important metrics to assess the validity of a candidate biomarker, such as positive predictive value and negative predictive value, were infrequently reported. Limitations of the currently available studies include mostly small sample size, heterogeneous approaches and candidate biomarker targets, undue focus on single instead of joint biomarker signatures, and incomplete accounting for potential confounding factors. Future multivariable and multi-level approaches may be best suited to find valid candidate biomarkers, which will then need to be validated in external, independent samples and then, importantly, tested in terms of feasibility and cost-effectiveness, before they can be implemented in daily clinical practice.

Objective: Impulsive choices can lead to suboptimal decision making, a tendency which is especially marked in individuals with ADHD. We compared two different paradigms assessing impulsive choice: the simple choice paradigm (SCP) and the temporal discounting paradigm (TDP). Method: Random effects meta-analyses on 37 group comparisons (22 SCP; 15 TDP) consisting of 3.763 participants (53% ADHD). Results: Small-to-medium effect sizes emerged for both paradigms, confirming that participants with ADHD choose small immediate over large delayed rewards more frequently than controls. Moderation analyses show that offering real rewards in the SCP almost doubled the odds ratio for participants with ADHD. Conclusion: We suggest that a stronger than normal aversion toward delay interacts with a demotivating effect of hypothetical rewards, both factors promoting impulsive choice in participants with ADHD. Furthermore, we suggest the SCP as the paradigm of choice due to its larger ecological validity, contextual sensitivity, and reliability.