This cohort study assesses whether stimulant medication for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder is associated with later substance use after considering age and other confounding factors not previously studied.
Conclusions and Relevance This study found no evidence that stimulant treatment was associated with increased or decreased risk for later frequent use of alcohol, marijuana, cigarette smoking, or other substances used for adolescents and young adults with childhood ADHD.
i want people to get what they need. but i see no reason to propagandize.
Findings: In this cohort study of 547 children initially treated in a randomized clinical trial for ADHD and assessed repeatedly to adulthood, comprehensive analyses did not support an association between stimulant treatment and adolescent or adulthood substance use or substance use disorder.
Meaning: This study found no evidence that stimulant treatment, predominantly prescribed in childhood and adolescence, protects against or increases risk of later frequent use of alcohol, cigarettes, marijuana, or other substance use by a mean age of 25 years.
Study found no effect. That is a result and supports the headline.
New research has found that youth who are prescribed stimulants to treat their ADHD are neither more nor less likely to become addicted to drugs later in life
The headline doesn’t mention that second half. You are talking about inferred meaning, which is actually interesting. Does inferred meaning make something inaccurate? Because, I inferred from the title that it was simply debunking a myth and setting things at a base level. Genuine question, how do you plan for that and how far would you take it?
are you sure you got that title right?
from the article:
i want people to get what they need. but i see no reason to propagandize.
Study found no effect. That is a result and supports the headline.
then title should read:
accuracy matters.
The headline doesn’t mention that second half. You are talking about inferred meaning, which is actually interesting. Does inferred meaning make something inaccurate? Because, I inferred from the title that it was simply debunking a myth and setting things at a base level. Genuine question, how do you plan for that and how far would you take it?