127
Views
6
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Review

Preferences related to attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and its treatment

, , &
Pages 33-43 | Published online: 17 Jan 2011

Abstract

Objectives

A growing body of literature has highlighted the importance of considering patient preferences as part of the medical decision-making process. The purpose of the current review was to identify and summarize published research on preferences related to attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and its treatment, while suggesting directions for future research.

Methods

A literature search identified 15 articles that included a choice-based assessment of preferences related to ADHD.

Results

The 15 studies were grouped into four categories based on preference content: preference for a treatment directly experienced by the respondent or the respondent’s child; preference for general treatment approaches; preference for a specific treatment attribute or outcome; and preference for aspects of ADHD-related treatment. Preference assessment methods ranged from global single items to detailed choice-based procedures, with few studies using rigorously developed assessment methods. Respondents included patients with ADHD, clinicians, parents, teachers, and survey respondents from the general population. Factors influencing preference include treatment characteristics, effectiveness for specific symptoms, side effects, and respondent demographics. Minimal research has examined treatment preferences of adults with ADHD.

Discussion

Because there is no dominant treatment known to be the first choice for all patients, ADHD is a condition for which individual preferences can play an important role when making treatment decisions for individual patients. Given the potential role of preferences in clinical decision-making, more research is needed to better understand the preferences of patients with ADHD and other individuals who are directly affected by the disorder, such as parents and teachers.

Objectives

A growing body of literature has highlighted the importance of considering patient preferences as part of the medical decision-making process.Citation1Citation3 Consequently, studies have assessed patient preferences for treatment options across a wide range of medical and psychiatric conditions such as cancer,Citation4Citation6 allergic rhinitis,Citation7 depression,Citation8 migraine,Citation9 diabetes,Citation10 and osteoporosis.Citation11 Several studies have examined preferences for treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), which is characterized by symptoms of inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity.Citation12 Research on preferences for treatment of childhood ADHD raises methodological questions as studies often examine preferences of individuals other than the children themselves, such as parents, teachers, clinicians, and the general public. In addition, although awareness of adult ADHD is growing,Citation13Citation16 little is known about preferences of adults with ADHD. Thus, the purpose of the current review was to identify and summarize published research on preferences related to ADHD and its treatment, while suggesting directions for future research.

Background: patient preference

Despite the range of definitions in the literature, there appears to be a consensus that the term ‘patient preference’ refers to a patient’s perception of the relative desirability of more than one health-related option.Citation17Citation20 Research has been conducted to identify and quantify patient preferences for a wide range of treatment options and health states. For example, some studies have asked patients to indicate which treatment option they preferred after receiving multiple treatments in a clinical trial with a crossover design.Citation7,Citation9,Citation21 Research participants have also been asked to express preferences among hypothetical health states that they have not necessarily experienced.Citation22 Preferences of individual patients may also be considered in clinical settings as part of a shared patient–clinician decision-making process.Citation17

Patient preference is considered important for several reasons. First, there is growing awareness that active patient participation in the medical decision-making process may have potential treatment benefits.Citation17,Citation18 Patients often want to be involved in these decisions,Citation23 and studies have found that greater patient involvement in health care decisions may be associated with increased treatment adherence, symptom relief, and treatment satisfaction.Citation8,Citation24Citation27 When making treatment decisions with individual patients, the patient’s preferences are likely to be consistent with evidence-based medicine and generally accepted clinical practices.Citation3 However, there are circumstances when individual patient preferences diverge from those of health professionals and the general public.Citation19 Individual patient preferences may be most important when clinical trial results have not yet indicated which treatment option tends to be more effective or when similarly effective treatment options could have different effects on quality of life.Citation17

Patient preference data collected in clinical trials and other studies could substantially contribute to large-scale health care decision-making. Patient preferences identified within studies involving larger samples can provide an indication of comparative treatment effectiveness in the total sample and among meaningful patient subgroups, which may help guide clinicians when deciding how to treat individual patients. In addition, preference data may shape broader treatment recommendations, as these data provide an indication of the patient’s perspective that could be used by decision-makers when drafting treatment guidelines and health policy.Citation17 Patient preferences are also used to quantify the health-related quality of life of health states. These resulting estimates called utilities, with values of 1 corresponding to full health and 0 corresponding to death, quantify health outcomes and treatment benefits and are used in cost-utility analyses which inform medical decision-making.Citation28,Citation29

Patient preferences are assessed with a wide variety of methods, ranging from global items to more detailed choice-based assessment methods. Some studies, including many clinical trials, have used straightforward single items asking patients which they prefer among two or more treatment options. In clinical trials with crossover designs, these single items may be used to assess preferences among treatments that the patients have recently experienced.Citation30Citation32 In other studies, patients may be asked to express preferences among a range of treatments or health-related options that they have not personally experienced.Citation33Citation36 Occasionally, global preference questions may be followed by Likert scale items assessing the strength of preference for the various options.Citation19 Studies aiming to quantify preferences in terms of utilities often use more complex methodology involving choices between hypothetical health state options. These methods, such as standard gamble (SG) and time-trade-off procedures, have been summarized previously.Citation29,Citation37,Citation38 The current review summarizes literature using any of these methods to assess preferences associated with ADHD.

Literature review methods

A literature search was conducted using the PubMed database with no restrictions on date of publication. An initial search for citations mentioning ADHD or any terms related to the disorder yielded 13,495 citations. Then, a second search identified articles relating to preference, using search terms corresponding to preference in a general sense, terms referring to a specific preference assessment method, and terms that could be related to preference such as acceptability and decision-making. These search terms included all forms (eg, singular and plural, abbreviations, alternative spellings, noun, and verb forms) of the following: health state utility, utility, discrete choice, standard gamble, time trade-off, quality-adjusted life year, conjoint analysis, patient preference, preference, prefer, satisfaction, acceptability, decision, and choice. The preference search, which yielded 757,804 citations, was then crossed with the ADHD search resulting in 1005 abstracts.

The 1005 abstracts, and full-text articles when necessary, were reviewed to identify articles meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria. For this literature review, ‘preference’ was conceptualized based on the definition proposed by Brennan and Strombom:Citation18 ‘statements made by individuals regarding the relative desirability of a range of health experiences, treatment options, or health states’. For a study to be considered a ‘preference study’, it was required that respondents were given a choice among multiple health-related options. Questionnaires or interviews assessing perceptions of a single treatment without comparison to an alternative option were not considered to be preference assessments, even if articles used terms that initially appeared to be relevant, such as ‘prefer’ or ‘choice’. Both informal methods (eg, unvalidated single items or interviews) and formal methods (eg, SG, time-trade-off, and discrete choice experiments) for assessing preference were included. Preferences of children with ADHD, adults with ADHD, parents, teachers, clinicians, and the general public were all considered to be relevant for the current review.

The following citations were excluded: review articles, conference presentations, letters, practice guidelines, case studies, and editorials. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses were not included, but these articles were examined in order to identify any utility or preference data that may have been cited. Articles focusing on conceptually related topics such as treatment acceptability, treatment satisfaction, treatment-related attitudes, and decision-making were excluded if respondents were not asked to indicate a preference among multiple health-related options. Although multiattribute measures such as the EQ-5D® and Health Utilities Index have scoring algorithms that were derived via preference-based tasks, studies administering these instruments were not included in the current review because respondents do not explicitly indicate preferences when completing these questionnaires.

Results: ADHD preference studies

Summary of preference studies

A total of 15 articles were identified that included a choice-based assessment of preference related to ADHD. For the current review, these 15 studies are organized into four categories based on the content of the preference assessment: 1) five studies assessing preference for a treatment directly experienced by the respondent or the respondent’s child with ADHD, 2) four studies assessing preference for general treatment approaches, 3) four studies assessing preference for a specific treatment attribute or outcome, and 4) two studies that did not fit into the three other categories because they did not examine preference for a treatment-related aspect of ADHD.

Seven studies that were excluded from this review used the term ‘preference’ when describing methods or results, but did not appear to include a choice-based assessment of preference among health-related options. Three of these seven studies used qualitative interview or focus group methods to elicit open-ended responses,Citation39Citation41 and the remaining four studies administered rating scales that assessed related constructs such as importance and acceptability.Citation42Citation45 These seven studies were excluded from the current review because they were not consistent with generally accepted definitions of ‘preference’, which involves a choice between two or more options.

Studies assessing preference for a specific experienced treatment

Five studies assessed preference for a treatment directly experienced by the respondent or the respondent’s child (). Three of the five studies presented results from clinical trials of medication treatment for ADHD in children and/or adolescents.Citation46Citation48 Because these studies focus on efficacy and safety of medication treatment, the published articles do not provide a detailed description of the preference assessment methods. The study by Efron et alCitation46 specified that a single-item assessment was completed by parents of children treated for ADHD, while the articles by Quintana et alCitation47 and Pelham et alCitation48 do not specify the preference assessment method. In the study by Efron et al,Citation46 the single-item assessment was completed at the end of the 4-week crossover trial of methylphenidate (MPH) and dexamphetamine (DEX), with findings indicating that more parents preferred the 2-week MPH treatment period over the 2-week DEX treatment period (46.6% vs 36.8% of parents). In the placebo-controlled, three-way crossover trial by Pelham et al,Citation48 children received treatment with immediate-release (IR) MPH three times daily, MPH once daily, and placebo, each for a 7-day period. Results from the unspecified preference assessment completed by parents at the end of the three treatment periods found that 47% of parents selected the once daily MPH formulation as the treatment of choice for their child versus 31% of parents who selected the immediate-release formulation taken three times daily. Finally, the study by Quintana et alCitation47 presents results from a 6-week clinical trial in which children and adolescents switched from psychostimulant treatment to treatment with atomoxetine. Although the preference assessment method and preference evaluator were not clearly specified in the study results, the abstract of this article reported that 65.5% of respondents expressed a preference for atomoxetine treatment over their psychostimulant.

Table 1 Studies assessing preference for treatments directly experienced by the respondents or their children

The remaining two studies assessing preference for a directly experienced treatment were double-blind choice procedures performed in small samples of adults (N = 10)Citation49 and children/adolescents (N = 5)Citation50 who were receiving treatment with MPH at the time of enrollment in the study. In both studies, participants received double-blind treatment with either placebo or MPH during each of the study ‘sampling sessions’, which were followed by the ‘choice sessions’ in which participants were asked to choose which treatment they would receive. Treatment options at these sessions included placebo, MPH, or neither treatment, with authors considering each participant’s choice to be an indicator of drug preference. In the choice procedure conducted with adult patients, MPH was chosen as treatment 50% of the time, placebo was chosen 32.5% of the time, and neither treatment was chosen 17.5% of the time, with the difference among treatment choices being significant (χ2 = 52.5, P < 0.001). In the study conducted with children, differences were also significant among treatment choices, with participants choosing MPH 60% of the time, placebo 20% of the time, and neither treatment 20% of the time (χ2 = 9.6, P < 0.01).

Although heterogeneity in study designs, variation in preference assessment methods, and differences in the ADHD treatments make it difficult to draw overall conclusions from these five studies, some general trends did emerge. Results of the double-blind choice procedures suggest a preference for MPH over placebo among adults and children who received both treatments, while the crossover trial by Efron et alCitation46 found that parents prefer MPH over DEX as treatment for their children. Results from the double-blind trial by Pelham et alCitation48 suggest that less frequent dosing may be preferable among parents, while the study by Quintana et alCitation47 suggests that a nonstimulant treatment might be preferable for some children and adolescents. Overall, these studies indicate that a preference assessment may be a useful approach for quantifying and comparing patients’ or parents’ experiences with drug treatments.

Studies assessing preference for general treatment approaches

presents results from the four studies assessing preference for a general treatment approach.Citation51Citation54 All four studies assessed preference using a survey or questionnaire. In three of the studies, participants responded by indicating their choice among multiple options. In the study by McLeod et al,Citation53 participants were asked yes/no questions regarding their opinions of counseling and medication treatment for ADHD. The authors then derived preferences based on the pattern of responses to these two questions. These four studies were conducted in samples of parents, teachers, and the general public. Across the four studies, the treatment approaches under investigation included medication-only regimens, nonmedication regimens (eg, counseling or behavior modification approaches), and combined approaches of medication and nonmedication treatments.

Table 2 Studies assessing preference for general treatment approaches

Results of these four studies generally suggested that combined treatment approaches may be preferred to mono-therapy treatment approaches for children with ADHD, but there is some variability in preferences. Three of the four studies found that a majority of respondents chose a combined treatment approach (ie, medication plus counseling or behavior modification) over a monotherapy treatment approach.Citation52Citation54 The respondents varied across these three studies, with samples consisting of teachers, the general public, and ethnically diverse parents of children with and without ADHD. The questionnaire included in the fourth study by Dos Reis et alCitation51 included an item relating to preference, with authors reporting results specific to racial-ethnic comparisons groups. Findings suggested that nonwhite parents were less likely than white parents to prefer medication over counseling as a treatment option for children with ADHD (59% of white parents vs 36% of nonwhite parents, P < 0.0001).

Studies assessing preference for treatment attributes or treatment outcomes

Four studies were identified that assessed preference for treatment attributes or outcomes (). Unlike the studies presented in , participants in these studies were not asked to report preferences for treatments that they, or their children, directly experienced. Instead, respondents were asked to indicate a preference for attributes or outcomes relating to hypothetical treatment choices. In these four studies, preference was assessed by a discrete choice experiment,Citation55 a SG utility assessment interview,Citation56,Citation57 or a survey mail-out.Citation58 Across the three studies involving a formal preference procedure (ie, discrete choice or SG), samples included parents of children or adolescents with ADHD. The sample in the study by Stockl et alCitation58 consisted of 365 physicians who were treating children and adolescents with ADHD.

Table 3 Studies assessing preference for treatment attributes or treatment outcomes

Several treatment attributes and outcomes were assessed in these studies, including the type of treatment (eg, stimulant vs nonstimulant), duration of effect, side effect profile, overall treatment efficacy, and impact on school and family functioning. Although the attributes and outcomes varied across these four studies, there was some consistency in results. Results from three studies suggested that nonstimulants may be preferred over stimulants for the treatment of children with ADHD.Citation56Citation58 In the utility studies by Matza et alCitation56 and Secnik et al,Citation57 parents expressed their preference for a nonstimulant treatment option over a stimulant treatment option when both hypothetical treatments were otherwise equal in terms of efficacy, side effect profile, and other treatment attributes. The survey results reported in Stockl et alCitation58 found that 38% of physicians strongly agreed or agreed that they would prefer prescribing a nonstimulant instead of a stimulant for the treatment of ADHD in children, provided that such options are available and Food and Drug Administration-approved. However, because the respondents did not necessarily have direct experience with nonstimulant medications and they were not provided with information on risks and benefits of stimulant treatment, these findings likely represent preconceived biases rather than preferences based on direct experience.

Two additional trends that emerged across these studies were a preference for treatments with no known abuse potential and a preference for treatments with better (ie, more tolerable) side effect profiles. Physicians completing the survey administered by Stockl et alCitation58 and parents participating in the discrete choice experiment described by Muhlbacher et alCitation55 indicated their preference for treatments with no known abuse potential over treatments with evidence of abuse potential. Parents participating in the utility study by Matza et alCitation56 and the discrete choice experiment by Muhlbacher et alCitation55 indicated that the side effect profile of a hypothetical ADHD medication was important in the selection of and preference for an ADHD treatment. Specific side effects that influenced preference in these studies included incidence of nausea, changes in weight and appetite, and whether the medication made the children feel drowsy or more ‘wired’.

Apart from the trends that emerged in the treatment attributes discussed above, the discrete choice experiment by Muhlbacher et alCitation55 assessed additional treatment characteristics that were not investigated in the other studies. This study found that treatments with a longer duration of action, greater potential for improvements in emotional state, and enhanced ability to enable social contacts would have the most influence in the parents’ selection of treatment for their children with ADHD. These findings suggest that real-world outcomes, in addition to treatment efficacy, contribute to preferences for their children’s treatment.

Studies not assessing a treatment-related aspect of ADHD

Finally, two additional studies were located that assessed preference for an aspect of ADHD that was not related to treatment. One study recruited a sample of 99 parents of children with ADHD to complete a survey assessing the importance placed on types of ADHD information and the preferred modes of receiving this information.Citation59 Parents were asked to preferentially rank the following ways of receiving information about their child’s ADHD: verbal, written, DVD/video, seminars, parenting class, audio, Internet, video, and CD-ROM. Authors found the most preferred mode of information delivery to be verbal information received directly from a professional, with written information being the second most preferred option.

Another study involved semistructured follow-up interviews with 19 teachers of elementary school students with ADHD who had participated in a 2-month clinical trial of an unspecified ADHD treatment.Citation60 The teachers were asked to compare the Web-based ADHD symptom rating scale that they completed during the trial (the T-SKAMP) to their previous experience with paper-and-pencil ADHD scales. Results of the interviews found teachers to generally prefer the Web-based scale, with 89.5% of teachers indicating that it was easier to complete than the paper-based scale.

Discussion

ADHD may be treated with a range of potentially effective pharmacological and behavioral treatment options. Because there is not a dominant treatment known to be the first choice for all patients, ADHD is a condition for which individual preferences can play an important role when determining a treatment approach for individual patients. In studies identified for the current review, a wide range of measurable treatment preferences were reported by patients with ADHD, clinicians, parents, teachers, and survey respondents from the general population. However, this literature search found only 15 studies using a choice-based preference assessment related to ADHD. Given the potential role of preferences in clinical decision-making, more research is needed to better understand the preferences of patients with ADHD and other individuals who are directly affected by the disorder, such as parents and teachers.

Five studies were identified that assessed preference between two treatment options directly experienced by the respondent or the respondent’s child, and all five studies yielded clear preferences (). Parents expressed preferences among stimulant treatment options,Citation46,Citation48 children expressed preferences for a nonstimulant over a stimulant,Citation47 and small samples of children and adults expressed preferences for MPH over placebo.Citation49,Citation50 One limitation of the current review is that clinical trials assessing preferences among ADHD treatment options would not have been located if they did not mention ‘preference’ or a related term in the published abstract. Therefore, it is possible that the current literature search failed to identify some published clinical trials that included a preference measure, but did not mention it in the abstract. Despite this limitation, results of the five identified studies suggest that preference data can complement clinical symptom measures by providing insight into the experiences of individuals directly affected by treatments. Based on these five studies, assessment of preference can be recommended for inclusion as an outcome measure in future clinical trials with study designs that allow patients to experience more than one treatment option. These preference assessments are more likely to yield useful results if the assessment tools are carefully developed and validated in the target population.

Additional studies assessed preferences for treatment approaches and attributes among respondents who did not necessarily have recent direct experience with the treatment options. Although these preferences were not assessed in the context of a controlled clinical trial, results may still provide useful information for clinical decision-makers. For example, parents, teachers, and general public survey respondents expressed preferences for combined treatment approaches involving both medication and nonpharmacological treatment such as counseling and behavioral modification.Citation52Citation54 Three additional studies revealed preferences for nonstimulant medications over stimulants among clinicians and parents.Citation56Citation58 Another study identified several therapy characteristics that may influence parents’ treatment preferences, such as addictive potential, improvement in concentration, effects on social functioning, emotional impact, duration of effect, dosage, and side effects.Citation55 Finally, one study found that parent preferences for medication and counseling may vary as a function of racial/ethnic background.Citation51 Taken together, these studies provide insight into factors that may influence patient, parent, and clinician preferences for ADHD treatment, such as treatment characteristics, effectiveness for specific symptoms, side effects, and respondent demographics. The variety of available treatment approaches and factors that can influence treatment preference underscores the importance of customizing treatment decisions based on the needs and preferences of each individual patient, as no single treatment approach will be suitable for all patients. Additional research on treatment and patient characteristics that influence preference could provide useful guidance for clinicians involved in choosing among treatment options for individual patients.

One significant gap identified in the current literature review is the minimal available research on treatment preferences of adults with ADHD. Although ADHD is often believed to be a disorder of childhood, symptoms such as inattention and impulsivity often persist into adulthood.Citation14Citation16,Citation61 Furthermore, pharmacological and psychosocial treatments are being developed, tested, and implemented in adults with ADHD.Citation62Citation68 However, the current literature search identified only one study examining preferences of adults with ADHD, and this study was conducted with a small sample.Citation49 Since there is a wide range of potentially effective treatment approaches for adult ADHD, research is needed to understand the treatment preferences of this population.

Another limitation of this literature is that most studies did not use carefully developed and validated instruments to assess preference. Some studies used invalidated global items,Citation46 while others did not clearly describe the method of preference assessment.Citation47,Citation48 Since the introduction of the Food and Drug Administration guidance on patient-reported outcomes, there has been a growing awareness of the importance of using carefully developed instruments that are validated for use in the target population.Citation69 We recommend that future studies of ADHD treatment incorporate more rigorously developed preference assessment methods, which can be clearly described in published articles.

Despite limitations of the currently available literature, findings of this review suggest that preference assessment could provide a useful indication of patients’ experiences with various treatment options. Across the 15 studies in this review, patients, parents, clinicians, and teachers were able to provide quantifiable preferences among multiple treatment options, and research has begun to identify treatment- and respondent-related factors that influence these preferences. As research on preferences related to ADHD grows, findings may be applied in clinical decision-making. Although current ADHD treatment guidelines acknowledge that parents and families may play a role in choosing a treatment,Citation70,Citation71 no guidance based on preference research is provided. As preference data accumulate in ADHD studies, findings could be incorporated into the decision-making process as described in treatment guidelines. Furthermore, such guidelines could encourage clinicians to include patients and families in the decision-making process. Additional research findings may help clinicians know how to initiate and facilitate these discussions. Finally, decision aids, such as booklets or Web sites, may be developed to provide information that will assist patients and parents as they contribute to their own treatment decisions.Citation72 Such decision aids have helped patients with other conditions develop their treatment preferences based on knowledge and information.Citation73 It is likely that patients and families affected by ADHD may experience similar benefits. ADHD may be particularly appropriate for consideration of patient preferences in the use of decision aids because it is a condition with a range of potentially effective treatment options. ADHD can be addressed with behavioral treatment, stimulant medication, nonstimulant medication, and a combination of behavioral and pharmacological treatments. Treatment approaches that help educate patients and parents while considering their preferences may be more effective than treatment decisions based on efficacy alone.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Aria Gray for production assistance. This study was funded by Eli Lilly and Company.

Disclosure

The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

References

  • KonAAThe shared decision-making continuumJAMA2010304890390420736477
  • MurrayEPollackLWhiteMLoBClinical decision-making: patients’ preferences and experiencesPatient Educ Couns200765218919616956742
  • KeirnsCCGooldSDPatient-centered care and preference-sensitive decision makingJAMA2009302161805180619861674
  • MandelblattJSSheppardVBHurriaABreast cancer adjuvant chemotherapy decisions in older women: the role of patient preference and interactions with physiciansJ Clin Oncol201028193146315320516438
  • FloodABWennbergJENeaseRFJrFowlerFJJrDingJHynesLMThe importance of patient preference in the decision to screen for prostate cancer. Prostate Patient Outcomes Research TeamJ Gen Intern Med19961163423498803740
  • UnicIVerhoefLCStalmeierPFvan DaalWAProphylactic mastectomy or screening in women suspected to have the BRCA1/2 mutation: a prospective pilot study of women’s treatment choices and medical and decision-analytic recommendationsMed Decis Making200020325126210929847
  • MeltzerEOAndrewsCJourneayGEComparison of patient preference for sensory attributes of fluticasone furoate or fluticasone propionate in adults with seasonal allergic rhinitis: a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind studyAnn Allergy Asthma Immunol2010104433133820408344
  • KocsisJHLeonACMarkowitzJCPatient preference as a moderator of outcome for chronic forms of major depressive disorder treated with nefazodone, cognitive behavioral analysis system of psychotherapy, or their combinationJ Clin Psychiatry200970335436119192474
  • DowsonABundyMSaltRKilminsterSPatient preference for triptan formulations: a prospective study with zolmitriptanHeadache20074781144115117883519
  • StocklKOryCVanderplasAAn evaluation of patient preference for an alternative insulin delivery system compared to standard vial and syringeCurr Med Res Opin200723113314617257475
  • GoldDTSafiWTrinhHPatient preference and adherence: comparative US studies between two bisphosphonates, weekly risedronate and monthly ibandronateCurr Med Res Opin200622122383239117257452
  • American Psychiatric AssociationDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders4th edWashington, DCAmerican Psychiatric Press2000
  • BiedermanJMickEFaraoneSA double-blind comparison of galantamine hydrogen bromide and placebo in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a pilot studyJ Clin Psychopharmacol200626216316616633145
  • FaraoneSVBiedermanJWhat is the prevalence of adult ADHD? Results of a population screen of 966 adultsJ Atten Disord20059238439116371661
  • KesslerRCAdlerLABarkleyRPatterns and predictors of attention- deficit/hyperactivity disorder persistence into adulthood: results from the national comorbidity survey replicationBiol Psychiatry200557111442145115950019
  • MannuzzaSKleinRGMoultonJL3rdPersistence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder into adulthood: what have we learned from the prospective follow-up studies?J Atten Disord2003729310015018358
  • BowlingAEbrahimSMeasuring patients’ preferences for treatment and perceptions of riskQual Health Care200110Suppl 1i2i811533430
  • BrennanPFStrombomIImproving health care by understanding patient preferences: the role of computer technologyJ Am Med Inform Assoc1998532572629609495
  • MontgomeryAAFaheyTHow do patients’ treatment preferences compare with those of clinicians?Qual Health Care200110Suppl 1i39i4311533437
  • SidaniSMirandaJEpsteinDRBootzinRRCousinsJMoritzPRelationships between personal beliefs and treatment acceptability, and preferences for behavioral treatmentsBehav Res Ther2009471082382919604500
  • DíezFIStraubeAZanchinGPatient preference in migraine therapy. A randomized, open-label, crossover clinical trial of acute treatment of migraine with oral almotriptan and rizatriptanJ Neurol2007254224224917334957
  • MatzaLSBoyeKSYurginNUtilities and disutilities for type 2 diabetes treatment-related attributesQual Life Res20071671251126517638121
  • GudagnoliEWardPPatient participation in decision makingSoc Sci Med1998473293399681902
  • BrodyDSMillerSMLermanCESmithDGCaputoGCPatient perception of involvement in medical care: relationship to illness attitudes and outcomesJ Gen Intern Med1989465065112585158
  • EisenthalSEmeryRLazareAUdinH“Adherence”and the negotiated approach to patienthoodArch Gen Psychiatry1979364393398426605
  • LazareAEisenthalSWassermanLThe customer approach to patienthood. Attending to patient requests in a walk-in clinicArch Gen Psychiatry19753255535581124971
  • RauePJSchulbergHCHeoMKlimstraSBruceMLPatients’ depression treatment preferences and initiation, adherence, and outcome: a randomized primary care studyPsychiatr Serv200960333734319252046
  • TorranceGWPreferences for health outcomes and cost-utility analysisAm J Manag Care19973SupplS82010180342
  • BrazierJRatcliffeJTsuchiyaASalomonJMeasuring and Valuing Health Benefits for Economic EvaluationNew York, NYOxford University Press2007
  • WerzMASchoenbergMRMeadorKJSubjective preference for lamotrigine or topiramate in healthy volunteers: relationship to cognitive and behavioral functioningEpilepsy Behav20068118119116377253
  • KendlerDKungAWFuleihan GelHPatients with osteoporosis prefer once weekly to once daily dosing with alendronateMaturitas200448324325115207890
  • LoderEBrandesJLSilbersteinSPreference comparison of rizatriptan ODT 10-mg and sumatriptan 50-mg tablet in migraineHeadache200141874575311576197
  • BernerMMKristonLSittaPHärterMTreatment of depressive symptoms and attitudes towards treatment options in a representative German general population sampleInt J Psychiatry Clin Pract2008121510
  • ByrneCMSolomonMJYoungJMSelbyWHarrisonJDPatient preferences between surgical and medical treatment in Crohn’s diseaseDis Colon Rectum200750558659717380368
  • DuarteJWBolgeSCSenSSAn evaluation of patients’ preferences for osteoporosis medications and their attributes: the PREFER-International studyClin Ther200729348850317577470
  • PeresMFSilbersteinSMoreiraFPatients’ preference for migraine preventive therapyHeadache200747454054517445103
  • TorranceGWUtility approach to measuring health-related quality of lifeJ Chronic Dis19874065936033298297
  • TorranceGWFeenyDUtilities and quality-adjusted life yearsInt J Technol Assess Health Care1989545595752634630
  • BussingRSchoenbergNEPerwienARKnowledge and information about ADHD: evidence of cultural differences among African-American and white parentsSoc Sci Med19984679199289541077
  • BussingRGaryFAMillsTLGarvanCWParental explanatory models of ADHD: gender and cultural variationsSoc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol2003381056357514564385
  • ShawKWagnerIEastwoodHMitchellGA qualitative study of Australian GPs’ attitudes and practices in the diagnosis and management of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)Fam Pract200320212913412651785
  • ChanERappaportLAKemperKJComplementary and alternative therapies in childhood attention and hyperactivity problemsJ Dev Behav Pediatr20032414812584479
  • WoodJCHeiskellKDDelayDMJongelingJAPerryDTeachers’ preferences for interventions for ethnically diverse learners with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorderAdolescence20094417427328819764267
  • PiseccoSHuzinecCCurtisDThe effect of child characteristics on teachers’ acceptability of classroom-based behavioral strategies and psychostimulant medication for the treatment of ADHDJ Clin Child Psychol200130341342111501257
  • PowerTJHessLEBennettDSThe acceptability of interventions for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder among elementary and middle school teachersJ Dev Behav Pediatr19951642382437593658
  • EfronDJarmanFBarkerMMethylphenidate versus dexamphetamine in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: a double-blind, crossover trialPediatrics19971006E69382907
  • QuintanaHCherlinEADuesenbergDATransition from methylphenidate or amphetamine to atomoxetine in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder – a preliminary tolerability and efficacy studyClin Ther20072961168117717692731
  • PelhamWEGnagyEMBurrows-MacleanLOnce-a-day Concerta methylphenidate versus three-times-daily methylphenidate in laboratory and natural settingsPediatrics20011076E10511389303
  • FredericksEMKollinsSHAssessing methylphenidate preference in ADHD patients using a choice procedurePsychopharmacology (Berl)2004175439139815258716
  • MacDonald FredericksEKollinsSHA pilot study of methylphenidate preference assessment in children diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorderJ Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol200515572974116262590
  • Dos ReisSZitoJMSaferDJSoekenKLMitchellJWJrEllwoodLCParental perceptions and satisfaction with stimulant medication for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorderJ Dev Behav Pediatr200324315516212806227
  • GlassCSWegarKTeacher perceptions of the incidence and management of the attention deficit hyperactivity disorderEducation20001212412420
  • McLeodJDFettesDLJensenPSPescosolidoBAMartinJKPublic knowledge, beliefs, and treatment preferences concerning attention-deficit hyperactivity disorderPsychiatr Serv200758562663117463342
  • PhamAVCarlsonJSKosciulekJFEthnic differences in parental beliefs of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and treatmentJ Atten Disord201013658459119414623
  • MuhlbacherACRudolphILinckeHJNublingMPreferences for treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): a discrete choice experimentBMC Health Serv Res2009914919678946
  • MatzaLSSecnikKRentzAMAssessment of health state utilities for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children using parent proxy reportQual Life Res200514373574716022066
  • SecnikKMatzaLSCottrellSEdgellETildenDMannixSHealth state utilities for childhood attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder based on parent preferences in the United KingdomMed Decis Making2005251567015673582
  • StocklKMHughesTEJarrarMASecnikKPerwienARPhysician perceptions of the use of medications for attention deficit hyperactivity disorderJ Manag Care Pharm20039541642314613439
  • SciberrasEIyerSEfronDGreenJInformation needs of parents of children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorderClin Pediatr (Phila)201049215015720080521
  • BhataraVSVogtHBPatrickSDoniparthiLEllisRAcceptability of a Web-based attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder scale (T-SKAMP) by teachers: a pilot studyJ Am Board Fam Med200619219520016513909
  • BiedermanJMonuteauxMCMickEYoung adult outcome of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: a controlled 10-year follow-up studyPsychol Med200636216717916420713
  • DavidsonMAADHD in adults: a review of the literatureJ Atten Disord200811662864118094324
  • KolarDKellerAGolfinopoulosMCumynLSyerCHechtmanLTreatment of adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorderNeuropsychiatr Dis Treat20084238940318728745
  • SafrenSASprichSChulvickSOttoMWPsychosocial treatments for adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorderPsychiatr Clin North Am200427234936015064001
  • SimpsonDPloskerGLAtomoxetine: a review of its use in adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorderDrugs200464220522214717619
  • SpencerTBiedermanJWilensTNonstimulant treatment of adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorderPsychiatr Clin North Am200427237338315064003
  • SpencerTBiedermanJWilensTStimulant treatment of adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorderPsychiatr Clin North Am200427236137215064002
  • WilensTEPharmacotherapy of ADHD in adultsCNS Spectr2008135 Suppl 8111318567133
  • Food and Drug AdministrationGuidance for Industry-Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Use in Medical Product Development to Support Labeling ClaimsSilver Spring, MDFDA2009
  • PliszkaSAACAP Work Group on Quality IssuesPractice parameter for the assessment and treatment of children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorderJ Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry200746789492117581453
  • National Institute for Health and Clinical ExcellenceAttention deficit hyperactivity disorder: diagnosis and management of ADHD in children, young people and adultsNICE Clinical Guideline200872159
  • EdwardsAElwynGThe potential benefits of decision aids in clinical medicineJAMA1999282877978010463715
  • O’ConnorAMRostomAFisetVDecision aids for patients facing health treatment or screening decisions: systematic reviewBMJ1999319721273173410487995