Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So true - girls need to sit and practice their embroidery.
Um... WHAT???? Just ... WHAT???
[Boys are affected/diagnosed at SIGNIFICANTLY higher rates than girls. Young boys need to MOVE throughout the day. Both of these statements? Are true. Not sure what embroidery has to do with ... anything. Are you a sexist?]
At first peek through, the study has a number of problems.
Parents were in control of both that actual treatment device and reported their child's outcomes. What may be good/bad is subjective when it comes to parental reporting, it is not an objective measure. And children react differently to doctors than parents. They are more eager to please parents, so behavior may be different. Many variables in this experiment. And NO FOLLOW UP beyond 5 weeks. That is the most troublesome. Generally if a treatment is going to work/high confidence? Longer followup is shown to support it's use -- a short follow-up to me is a red flag. No confidence in long-term success. No interest in gathering data past that cutoff point.
At first peek through, the study has a number of problems.
Parents were in control of both that actual treatment device and reported their child's outcomes. What may be good/bad is subjective when it comes to parental reporting, it is not an objective measure. And children react differently to doctors than parents. They are more eager to please parents, so behavior may be different. Many variables in this experiment. And NO FOLLOW UP beyond 5 weeks. That is the most troublesome. Generally if a treatment is going to work/high confidence? Longer followup is shown to support it's use -- a short follow-up to me is a red flag. No confidence in long-term success. No interest in gathering data past that cutoff point.
I'll have to dive deeper.
Please do... Because there were multiple measures, some clinical. And the study was blinded with a sham device.
At first peek through, the study has a number of problems.
Parents were in control of both that actual treatment device and reported their child's outcomes. What may be good/bad is subjective when it comes to parental reporting, it is not an objective measure. And children react differently to doctors than parents. They are more eager to please parents, so behavior may be different. Many variables in this experiment. And NO FOLLOW UP beyond 5 weeks. That is the most troublesome. Generally if a treatment is going to work/high confidence? Longer followup is shown to support it's use -- a short follow-up to me is a red flag. No confidence in long-term success. No interest in gathering data past that cutoff point.
I'll have to dive deeper.
Quote:
Originally Posted by reneeh63
Please do... Because there were multiple measures, some clinical. And the study was blinded with a sham device.
Get on it man! ...we're waiting...
If I read the study correctly, the improvements that built weekly through the 4th week largely disappeared when the device was turned off during the 5th week. That is a pretty powerful sign - A/B-B/A tests can be pretty compelling when you see reversals like this, even though this one was short.
Great! A medical intervention to treat a made-up disease.
This will end very badly.
Poor kids. Damn shame they don't have parents smart enough to see through this nonsense.
Please explain.
While I don’t think this device has been researched and tested properly, as the father of 2 ADHD boys I can assure you their condition is not “made up”.
Please don’t confuse inattention or being a little “hyper” (which is normal for young boys) with the inability to focus and learn, or to have any impulse control.
I could have smacked my kids all day, or ran them ragged until they were exhausted, and it still wouldn’t have helped. It took both a multitude of factors and therapy over years to improve and overcome.
If I read the study correctly, the improvements that built weekly through the 4th week largely disappeared when the device was turned off during the 5th week. That is a pretty powerful sign - A/B-B/A tests can be pretty compelling when you see reversals like this, even though this one was short.
You have not recognized the concerns of having parents -- not researchers -- fully in charge of the administration of a device, complete control over the devices settings, and the reporting outcomes to researchers, which are generally on a likert scale -- that is they are NOT transalatable from patient to patient. Your pain threshold or view of improvement? Is different than mine.
Parents are not unbiased. Children respond to parents on an emotional level. Children want to please parents. That is an issue. Researchers are supposed to be unbiased. /shrug/
It's OK if you choose to ignore that. Not engaging you any longer because you are not fully informed and don't understand how clinical trials are run. Have fun!
While I don’t think this device has been researched and tested properly, as the father of 2 ADHD boys I can assure you their condition is not “made up”.
Please don’t confuse inattention or being a little “hyper” (which is normal for young boys) with the inability to focus and learn, or to have any impulse control.
I could have smacked my kids all day, or ran them ragged until they were exhausted, and it still wouldn’t have helped. It took both a multitude of factors and therapy over years to improve and overcome.
I don't disagree that some children have issues; however, I do not agree that every boy that has been diagnosed? Actually has ADHD. I think it is an over-diagnosis.
I met someone a few years ago whose son had been tagged by his teacher as ADHD. It went up the chain and the mom was told that the son needed medication or the school would not allow him to attend. It was a public school. She said . um h-ll NO, withdrew him and put him a charter school. He flourished. No problems. No drugs needed. Different environment that was more active and supportive. It was a drama-based charter school, so movement and activities were part of daily curriculum.
The change in circumstance -- from sitting all day -- to being allowed to move and speak? Was life-changing for this boy. He's lucky to have a mom who fought for him instead of drugging him.
There is a school in my area that is PE based. They have 3 20-min PE classes every day. That's where some parents send their kids because it keeps them active and engaged afterward so they can actually sit, focus and learn.
You have not recognized the concerns of having parents -- not researchers -- fully in charge of the administration of a device, complete control over the devices settings, and the reporting outcomes to researchers, which are generally on a likert scale -- that is they are NOT transalatable from patient to patient. Your pain threshold or view of improvement? Is different than mine.
Parents are not unbiased. Children respond to parents on an emotional level. Children want to please parents. That is an issue. Researchers are supposed to be unbiased. /shrug/
It's OK if you choose to ignore that. Not engaging you any longer because you are not fully informed and don't understand how clinical trials are run. Have fun!
What is your background in knowledge of clinical trials, pray tell?
I told you that parents only provided ONE of the measures - there were numerous ratings made by clinicians (NOT the researchers) as well as PHYSICAL readings taken. All studies average over their ratings to control for subjectivity and variability. That's why statistics are used to determine if the differences seen overcome the inherent variability. But as noted, they used several kinds of measures much less affected in that way. Didn't you read about THOSE?
You don't think it's important to understand if the differences found using the device were enough to be notable to parents?! If they were only statistically significant clinical ratings you'd be screaming that parental ratings weren't taken into account! That's why they looked at several aspects of behavior.
If everyone is BLINDED, how does that impact those subjective ratings? During the study all kids wore a device - made to look identical (that's called a "sham device"). Sure, parents are biased...ALL parents - that's why this was a blinded study. You don't understand how that works? Researchers are pretty smart - whatever you think of, it's a good guess they have too and controlled for it.
YOU are obviously uninformed about how experimental studies are done. The study is small but statistical significance is calculated based on sample size - if you don't know that then you know nothing. Smaller studies require larger impacts to prove themselves. Have you taken a single statistics course in college?
If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen - you already announced that you've LEFT THE BUILDING!...you wanted an actual study but you don't even know how to read a study and interpret it correctly.
I don't disagree that some children have issues; however, I do not agree that every boy that has been diagnosed? Actually has ADHD. I think it is an over-diagnosis.
I met someone a few years ago whose son had been tagged by his teacher as ADHD. It went up the chain and the mom was told that the son needed medication or the school would not allow him to attend. It was a public school. She said . um h-ll NO, withdrew him and put him a charter school. He flourished. No problems. No drugs needed. Different environment that was more active and supportive. It was a drama-based charter school, so movement and activities were part of daily curriculum.
The change in circumstance -- from sitting all day -- to being allowed to move and speak? Was life-changing for this boy. He's lucky to have a mom who fought for him instead of drugging him.
There is a school in my area that is PE based. They have 3 20-min PE classes every day. That's where some parents send their kids because it keeps them active and engaged afterward so they can actually sit, focus and learn.
Just a thought.
Oh, I do believe it's over-diagnosed. Consider 2 scenarios:
1) Parent sees 5 year old child is hyperactive or inattentive. Goes to pediatrician who says it's ADHD. Gets prescribed medication.
2) Parent sees 5 year old child is hyperactive or inattentive. Parent goes to pediatrician who recommends some activity or dietary changes. No improvement so referral to therapist AND specialist occurs. At that point a formal diagnosis is made (which is important for school purposes.) Therapy starts, and also special placement in a better environment (smaller class size, etc.) Child still has major impulse control issues and is struggling in school, so in consultation with specialist, parent now tries medication. Difference is major and immediate - like flipping a switch. Child's focus and grades improve, impulse control improves, and in conjunction with therapy, child is able to transform over a number of years from not being able to even attend school to being in the gifted program with straight A's, and even no longer being classified as a special ed student.
#1 should never occur, but it does. Some parents either don't have the patience or they have doctors who are too quick to prescribe.
#2 is pretty much my story with my eldest child. My youngest is also getting there too.
To help track activity my kids each have an Apple Watch (the old ones from my wife and I) and I can see how many steps, etc. they are doing each day. They walk to/from the bus stop, and as they're now in middle school they walk all day from class to class. We do other activities outside of school to keep them moving. I wish they had more PE but it is what it is. Neither is overweight and both are sufficiently active.
One last point - your example says he had a mom who fought for him instead of "drugging him". I totally agree that the parent needs to be the advocate for the child and to look out for what's best.
If the child was able to cope without medication (or therapy) then even if he WAS actually ADHD it would have been mild. My kids are at least "moderate". They were in a VERY restrictive school program, VERY small class size, with an aide, AND kept active, and yet there were still major problems with impulse control. My oldest also had major self-esteem problems, was losing weight, and so on. What medication did was to give him enough control to get some self-confidence, to improve his behavior and grades to transition into a mainstream school, then into a mainstream gen ed class, and eventually out of special ed services altogether. He's on the minimum dosage, and has been for years, and it does "just enough" to let him be himself. It doesn't turn him into a "zombie" as some will allege.
As a parent, I honestly wish my kids didn't need to take medication. But if a child needs it and it is denied, it's a much harder road to travel if the parent withholds it due to principle. When my kids are adults they can decide for themselves but for the moment it's up to me and their doctors with their input. Both are old enough now (and in one instance for each have missed taking their medicine one day) and they notice the difference. It's possible later into their teens that they can use coping strategies and get off of medication altogether.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
