↓ Skip to main content

Bright light therapy versus physical exercise to prevent co-morbid depression and obesity in adolescents and young adults with attention-deficit / hyperactivity disorder: study protocol for a…

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
9 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
449 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Bright light therapy versus physical exercise to prevent co-morbid depression and obesity in adolescents and young adults with attention-deficit / hyperactivity disorder: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Trials, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13063-017-2426-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jutta S. Mayer, Katharina Hees, Juliane Medda, Oliver Grimm, Philip Asherson, Mariano Bellina, Michael Colla, Pol Ibáñez, Elena Koch, Antonio Martinez-Nicolas, Adrià Muntaner-Mas, Anna Rommel, Nanda Rommelse, Saskia de Ruiter, Ulrich W. Ebner-Priemer, Meinhard Kieser, Francisco B. Ortega, Johannes Thome, Jan K. Buitelaar, Jonna Kuntsi, J. Antoni Ramos-Quiroga, Andreas Reif, Christine M. Freitag

Abstract

The risk for major depression and obesity is increased in adolescents and adults with attention-deficit / hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and adolescent ADHD predicts adult depression and obesity. Non-pharmacological interventions to treat and prevent these co-morbidities are urgently needed. Bright light therapy (BLT) improves day-night rhythm and is an emerging therapy for major depression. Exercise intervention (EI) reduces obesity and improves depressive symptoms. To date, no randomized controlled trial (RCT) has been performed to establish feasibility and efficacy of these interventions targeting the prevention of co-morbid depression and obesity in ADHD. We hypothesize that the two manualized interventions in combination with mobile health-based monitoring and reinforcement will result in less depressive symptoms and obesity compared to treatment as usual in adolescents and young adults with ADHD. This trial is a prospective, pilot phase-IIa, parallel-group RCT with three arms (two add-on treatment groups [BLT, EI] and one treatment as usual [TAU] control group). The primary outcome variable is change in the Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology total score (observer-blinded assessment) between baseline and ten weeks of intervention. This variable is analyzed with a mixed model for repeated measures approach investigating the treatment effect with respect to all three groups. A total of 330 participants with ADHD, aged 14 - < 30 years, will be screened at the four study centers. To establish effect sizes, the sample size was planned at the liberal significance level of α = 0.10 (two-sided) and the power of 1-β = 80% in order to find medium effects. Secondary outcomes measures including change in obesity, ADHD symptoms, general psychopathology, health-related quality of life, neurocognitive function, chronotype, and physical fitness are explored after the end of the intervention and at the 12-week follow-up. This is the first pilot RCT on the use of BLT and EI in combination with mobile health-based monitoring and reinforcement targeting the prevention of co-morbid depression and obesity in adolescents and young adults with ADHD. If at least medium effects can be established with regard to the prevention of depressive symptoms and obesity, a larger scale confirmatory phase-III trial may be warranted. German Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00011666. Registered on 9 February 2017. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03371810. Registered on 13 December 2017.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 449 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 449 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 61 14%
Student > Master 58 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 47 10%
Researcher 36 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 32 7%
Other 75 17%
Unknown 140 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 63 14%
Psychology 60 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 49 11%
Sports and Recreations 34 8%
Social Sciences 14 3%
Other 66 15%
Unknown 163 36%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 April 2019.
All research outputs
#1,704,115
of 18,192,388 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#585
of 4,745 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,076
of 285,360 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,192,388 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,745 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 285,360 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them