Evidence, Interpretation, and Qualification From Multiple.pdf

Journal of Attention Disorders Vol. 12(1):15-43 (2008) ISSN: 1087-0547 doi: 10.1177/1087054708319525 This is a peer reviewed pre-print version of the following article: Evidence, Interpretation, and Qualification From Multiple Reports of Long-Term Outcomes in the Multimodal Treatment Study of Children With ADHD (MTA) Part II: Supporting Details, which has been published in final form at: /home.nav / /content/12/1/4.full.pdf+html © 2008 Sage Publications Ltd. Evidence, Interpretation, and Qualification From Multiple Reports of Long- Term Outcomes in the Multimodal Treatment Study of Children With ADHD (MTA) Part II: Supporting Details James Swanson, L. Eugene Arnold, Helena Kraemer, Lily Hechtman, Brooke Molina, Stephen Hinshaw, Benedetto Vitiello, Peter Jensen, Ken Steinhoff, Marc Lerner, Laurence Greenhill, Howard Abikoff, Karen Wells, Jeffery Epstein, Glen Elliott, Jeffrey Newcorn, Betsy Hoza, and Timothy Wigal. MTA Cooperative Group Objective: To review and provide details about the primary and secondary findings from the Multimodal Treatment study of ADHD (MTA) published during the past decade as three sets of articles. Method: In the second of a two part article, we provide additional background and detail required by the complexity of the MTA to address confusion and controversy about the findings outlined in part I (the Executive Summary). Results: We present details about the gold standard used to produce scientific evidence, the randomized clinical trial (RCT), which we applied to evaluate the long-term effects of two well-established unimodal treatments, Medication Management (MedMGT) and behavior therapy (Beh), the multimodal combination (Comb), and treatment “as usual” in the community (CC). For each of the first three assessment points defined