Knowledge Graphs Based on Meta-Analysis Papers Improve the Quality of Case Formulation: Mixed Methods Design

Background: Case formulation (CF) is a core skill for therapists; however, creating high-quality CFs requires considerable time. Objective: This study aims to demonstrate that providing a knowledge graph based on meta-analytic literature can enhance CF quality. Methods: Five groups were established, including 4 large language model groups and 1 human expert group, each generating 25 CFs based on 25 vignettes. The control group with Claude (Sonnet 3.7; Anthropic) produced 25 CFs. The personalization group served as the control group with additional personalization prompts. The knowledge graph group used a large language model that generated 25 CFs, which was provided with a meta-analysis knowledge graph. Further incorporation of additional personalization prompts then comprised the knowledge graph with personalization group. Finally, the expert group consisted of 25 CFs generated by a human expert. These 125 CFs in total were evaluated for general quality (ie, correctness, completeness, feasibility, and consistency) using a 7-point scale and 18 essential elements with binary scores (0 or 1) by another human expert. The CFs were also qualitatively analyzed. Results: The knowledge graph and knowledge graph with personalization groups scored significantly higher than the control group in terms of correctness, completeness, and feasibility. The expert group scored significantly higher on consistency than the machine-generated groups. Additionally, there was no significant difference in the feasibility scores among the knowledge graph, knowledge graph with personalization, and expert groups. The qualitative evaluation suggested that human CFs narrow the text to content that is easy for the client to read, whereas machine CFs are more likely to include expressions that are unnatural to the client. Conclusions: These results indicate that providing knowledge graphs to novice therapists increases the correctness, completeness, and feasibility of CF. Providing experienced therapists with knowledge graphs is suggested to improve the quality of their CF and mental health services.
<img src="https://jmir-production.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/thumbs/7d68afb473b485455c0e84aa0bb111d5" />

Expedited Transition to Digital Delivery of Recovery Support Services Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic: Mixed Methods Needs Assessment

Background: Recovery support services (RSS) are an evidence-based approach to support recovery from substance use disorders, most often composed of peer-to-peer support, referrals to housing, job training, and other forms of prosocial engagement and activities. During the COVID-19 pandemic, RSS providers quickly converted in-person services to digital delivery to avoid disruption. It is unclear if this rapid conversion impacted the delivery of services or if this delivery model could enhance RSS reach and uptake more generally by extending the reach of RSS providers and offering an alternative delivery method and access point. Objective: The goal of this study was to identify how RSS providers in Texas adapted their services for digital delivery and to what extent, if at all, technology limitations (eg, lack of digital infrastructure) were present. Methods: We conducted an electronic survey of 85 RSS providers, assessing their current capacity and methods for the digital recovery support service (D-RSS), followed by semistructured online interviews with a subset of 20 respondents. Results: Most survey respondents (74/85, 87.1%) used D-RSS, though they used many dated technologies, devices, and platforms for service delivery. Many respondents indicated that they use Zoom (Zoom Video Communications) videoconferencing to communicate with participants; however, providers also indicated that they must use several different technology platforms to accomplish their service delivery goals. Four main themes emerged from the interviews: (1) the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on RSS, (2) barriers and facilitators to technology-delivered D-RSS, (3) awareness and expectations regarding the use of D-RSS, and (4) training needs to deliver D-RSS. Conclusions: RSS organizations have access to technology for D-RSS; however, the technology is often outdated. Because the pandemic required a rapid and unexpected shift to D-RSS to maintain and potentially expand access during a public health emergency, providers desire guidance for training staff and participants on how to best use technology. A subset of providers endorsed the potential of a unified platform for D-RSS delivery, especially for data capture. Most barriers to D-RSS identified by our respondents may be addressable through the streamlined deployment of technology resources, rigorous training and onboarding programs in best practices for providers and participants, and tailored implementation strategies for varying local contexts.
<img src="https://jmir-production.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/thumbs/3a2240fcd24e97753a368fb6d403d6fb" />

Governing Ethical Tensions in Youth Digital Mental Health Research

As mental health research increasingly aims to generate societal impact, researchers operate at the intersection of innovation and ethical responsibility. Drawing on experiences from the cocreated NEON Young Norway Study on youth recovery narratives, this viewpoint identifies four ethical tensions that arise from the existing governance frameworks in youth digital mental health research: (1) balancing safeguarding against harm with youth participation, (2) protecting privacy without undermining authentic storytelling, (3) governing unpredictable outcomes of cocreated research, and (4) meeting ethical and legal standards while ensuring youth-friendly communication. These tensions highlight limitations in mental health research that adopts participatory and digital approaches, as this often struggles to accommodate iterative designs, narrative data, and cross-sector collaboration. We argue that responsible youth mental health research requires ethics to be understood as a dynamic, participatory practice that supports safe and equitable inclusion, rather than having a focus on risk prevention. Ethical governance, therefore, needs to evolve toward proportionate, context-sensitive approaches that can enable innovation while protecting young people’s rights, agency, and voices.
<img src="https://jmir-production.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/thumbs/123af813428fc7e274490540157cb83a" />

What Are Intrusive Thoughts?

When a child confesses a frightening thought that seemed to come out of nowhere — “What if I hurt someone with this knife?” “What if mom dies in a car accident?” “What if germs get into this paper cut and I die of an infection?”  — you can both find it confusing and disturbing.  But in most cases these intrusive thoughts are not evidence of a problem.

Intrusive thoughts are unwanted ideas, images, or urges that pop into the mind seemingly out of nowhere. They might feel embarrassing, violent, sexual, or just plain strange — and they feel completely out of character, which is exactly why they’re so upsetting. “An intrusive thought is a lot like your brain sending junk mail,” says Theresa Welles, PhD, a clinical psychologist and director of the Bubrick Center for Pediatric OCD at the Child Mind Institute. “Just because it shows up doesn’t mean it’s important or true or something you even want.”

It also doesn’t necessarily mean that a child has OCD or another mental health disorder. Though intrusive thoughts are associated with OCD — in which unwanted thoughts (called obsessions) drive children to perform rituals (called compulsions) to alleviate them — for many children they are just fleeting thoughts. It’s only when kids become unable to let them go that they are concerning. Another way to think about it, says Dr. Welles, is that “the brain’s job is to generate thoughts, the same way an apple tree’s job is to produce apples. Not every apple is perfect — some are misshapen or wormy. And not every thought is meaningful or worth paying attention to. Having a thought is not the same as wanting it or intending to act on it.”

Who has intrusive thoughts

“Everyone who has a brain has them,” says Caitlyn Downie, LCSW, director of trauma and resilience at the Child Mind Institute. “It’s part of the human existence.” A child might suddenly imagine something terrible happening to a parent, or a teenager might have a violent or sexual thought that feels shocking or shameful. Most of the time, these pass quickly — unpleasant, but easy enough to brush aside.

That’s the key distinction: not the thought itself, but what happens after it. The concern isn’t that the thought appeared — it’s how the child responds, how often it returns, and whether it starts getting in the way of daily life.

For some children — particularly those who are anxious, perfectionistic, or who have OCD — intrusive thoughts become “sticky.” Instead of passing through, the thought snags. The child starts paying attention to it, trying to figure it out or make it go away, which only makes it feel more powerful. “Young people lack the experience to recognize that thoughts aren’t the same as intentions, desires, or actions,” Dr. Welles says. “The thoughts feel alarming. So the child pays more attention, and the more attention they give it, the more often it returns.” That loop of fear and self-doubt is what parents and clinicians need to be alert to.

When should parents be concerned?

Many children are too ashamed or frightened to describe what’s actually going on, so parents may never hear about the thought itself. Instead, changes in behavior are often the first clue. Look for signs like:

  • Increased distress, irritability, or moodiness
  • Avoidance of something that wasn’t previously a problem
  • Trouble concentrating or sleeping
  • Excessive guilt or repeated reassurance seeking
  • Rituals like checking, counting, washing hands, or going through routines in a specific way

It’s worth seeking professional support when intrusive thoughts are frequent and intense, hard to shake, causing real distress, or getting in the way of school, friendships, or daily routines.

Why intrusive thoughts feel so frightening

When an intrusive thought appears, it can set off the body’s alarm system — the same ancient survival mechanism that helped people run from danger or fight it off. In anxiety and OCD, that alarm bell rings when there’s no real emergency. The child has a thought, the body reacts with panic, and the child assumes the thought must be important because it feels big and important.

Children may also fall into what clinicians call thought-action fusion. “That’s the mistaken belief that having a thought makes it more likely to happen,” explains Dr. Welles, “or that it reveals something terrible about who they are.” A child who thinks, “What if I hurt my baby brother?” may become convinced the thought means they secretly want to — but intrusive thoughts are often the precise opposite of what a child would ever want. Paradoxically, Dr. Welles says, “for most people with anxiety disorders and OCD, these thoughts are the actual opposite of what they would ever do.”

How parents can help

The first thing to do is stay calm — harder than it sounds if the thought is violent, sexual, or taboo. Children look to their parents to gauge whether something is truly dangerous, so if you look horrified, your child takes that as confirmation the thought is something to fear.

When a child shares an intrusive thought, Downie suggests responding with warmth and curiosity: “Say something like, ‘I appreciate you telling me — it sounds like that was really scary.’ It also helps to normalize it: ‘A lot of people have thoughts they don’t particularly like.’” Some other responses that can help:

  • “That sounds really upsetting — I’m glad you told me.”
  • “Having a thought doesn’t mean you want it or that it’ll ever happen.”
  • “You don’t have to figure this out right now.”

The goal is to help your child feel less alone and less ashamed, without treating the thought like a five-alarm emergency. And do your best to avoid reassurance. Reassuring the child about the contents of a specific thought (for example, responding to a child who asks, “Are you sure I’m a good person?” with “Yes, you’re a good person”) can actually make things worse, especially in kids with OCD. They feel very temporary relief but then the thought creeps back and they need more reassurance. It becomes a cycle. Instead try: “I know this feels awful. And I know you can handle it.”

It also helps to redirect the child to something concrete: getting dressed, eating breakfast, watching a show, texting a friend. With younger kids, you might guide them in doing slow breaths or suggest they move to another room so they distract themselves from the thought. With teens, you might mean teach them to resist the urge to Google their fears or thoughts, confess, or ask the same question over and over again. “The idea,” Downie says, “is to validate the feeling without validating the fear. You’re saying: ‘I hear you, this is hard, and you can get through it.’”

What can cause intrusive thoughts?

Intrusive thoughts aren’t a diagnosis on their own — they’re a symptom that can show up across a range of conditions, or in children who have no diagnosis at all. Disorders they may be associated with include:

  • OCD: The most closely associated condition. Common themes include harm, contamination, sexual thoughts, and religious or moral fears.
  • Generalized anxiety: Tends to involve repetitive “what if” worries about everyday concerns — school, safety, family, the future.
  • Social anxiety: Brings intrusive thoughts about embarrassment, rejection, or being judged by peers.
  • PTSD: Can involve intrusive memories, images, or sensations tied to a traumatic event. “A child who has experienced trauma may worry about being harmed again or even about harming someone else,” Downie notes, “but that doesn’t mean every child with trauma will have intrusive thoughts.”
  • Depression: Often involves intrusive thoughts that fit a negative self-image: I’m worthless. I’m a burden. I’m a bad person.
  • Autism spectrum disorder: Repetitive thoughts often center on a special interest and aren’t typically unwanted or distressing the way OCD thoughts are — though they can look similar from the outside.
  • Psychotic disorders: Young people with psychosis tend to experience intrusive thoughts as fixed and real, without the self-awareness that typically accompanies anxiety-driven ones. Psychotic disorders such as schizophrenia are rare in children, though early signs can appear in the teenage years.

How intrusive thoughts are treated

Treatment depends on what’s driving the thoughts and how much they’re disrupting the child’s life:

  • For OCD, the gold-standard treatment is exposure and response prevention (ERP), a specialized form of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) where children practice sitting with intrusive thoughts without doing compulsions. Over time, they learn to tolerate uncertainty and discover that the thought, however uncomfortable, isn’t actually dangerous.
  • For anxiety, the same treatments are helpful. CBT helps children understand the connection between thoughts, feelings, and behaviors, and ERP helps kids learn to tolerate the anxiety these thoughts generate, and it gradually diminishes.
  • For trauma, treatment may include trauma-focused CBT. Mindfulness, DBT skills, and breathing exercises can also help regulate the nervous system.
  • Family involvement matters a great deal. “Parents often need help learning how to respond without accidentally feeding the anxiety cycle,” Dr. Welles says. SPACE (Supportive Parenting for Anxious Childhood Emotions) is an evidence-based approach that helps parents reduce accommodation and support their child’s brave behavior instead.
  • For moderate-to-severe OCD or anxiety, medication — typically an SSRI — may also be worth discussing with a psychiatrist or pediatrician.

Helping your child trust their own mind

One of the hardest things about intrusive thoughts is that they can make children afraid of their own minds — convinced that every thought needs to be examined or explained away before they can relax. But no one gets to have only pleasant, well-behaved thoughts.  

What children can learn is that a thought can be upsetting without being meaningful, loud without being true, and it can pass through without becoming a verdict on who they are. As parents, the most powerful thing you can offer is a calm, steady presence — taking it seriously without treating it as a catastrophe. When your child sees you aren’t panicked, they get to borrow some of that calm for themselves.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are intrusive thoughts?

Intrusive thoughts are unwanted ideas, images, or urges that pop into your mind unexpectedly. They often feel upsetting or out of character, but they’re essentially “junk mail” from the brain — not meaningful or important.

Are intrusive thoughts normal?

Yes, everyone can have them. Most children (and adults) experience intrusive thoughts at times, and in many cases they pass quickly without causing problems.

What causes intrusive thoughts?

They’re a normal byproduct of how the brain works, but they can become more frequent or “sticky” in kids who are anxious, perfectionistic, or dealing with conditions like OCD or trauma. Paying extra attention to the thought can also make it return more often.

Do intrusive thoughts mean I want to act on them?

No. Having an intrusive thought doesn’t mean you want to act on it or that it reflects who you are. In fact, these thoughts are often the opposite of what someone would ever want or do.

The post What Are Intrusive Thoughts? appeared first on Child Mind Institute.

Use of a Conversational Agent for Training Mental Health Professionals in Suicide Safety Planning: Pilot Feasibility and Acceptability Study

Background: Safety planning is recognized as one of the most effective interventions for reducing suicidal behaviors. The quality of safety plans strongly depends on professional training, and traditional methods, such as role-playing, are time-consuming and offer limited opportunities for repetition across diverse patient profiles. Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) may provide innovative solutions by offering accessible, flexible, and realistic training environments. Objective: This pilot study aimed to evaluate the acceptability and feasibility of a GenAI-based simulator designed to train mental health professionals in safety planning. Methods: Twenty nurses and nursing assistants from psychiatric units in a French university hospital participated in a pre-post, single-session evaluation. After self-rating their ability, competence, and willingness to manage patients experiencing suicidal ideation, participants interacted individually with the text-based simulator for 20 minutes to perform a safety plan with a chatbot, then completed postsimulation acceptability items, and open-ended feedback. Composite scores were computed: acceptability (eg, helpfulness; 0‐40), realism (eg, looking like real interaction with patient; 0‐20), and challenge (eg, emotional challenge; 0‐30). Pre-post changes were tested (Wilcoxon signed-rank test), and age-group comparisons were performed. Results: Acceptability was high (mean 31.9/40, SD 5.3; median 32, IQR 7), realism moderate-to-high (mean 15.1/20, SD 4.1; median 15, IQR 5.25), and challenge manageable (mean 17.0/30, SD 8; median 18, IQR 12.5). Participants rated usefulness (mean 7.65/10, SD 1.57; median 8, IQR 1.57), perceived learning (mean 7.6/10, SD 1.79; median 8, IQR 2), recommendation to use the chatbot for training (mean 8.3/10, SD 1.59; median 9, IQR 2.25), and feedback quality (mean 8.35/10, SD 1.27; median 8.5, IQR 1.25) favorably. Willingness to actively manage patients experiencing suicidal ideation significantly increased postsimulation (.03). Younger participants reported higher acceptability (.04) and realism (.03). Participants reported minimal concerns regarding the simulator’s use. Conclusions: This pilot study demonstrates that a GenAI-based simulator for safety planning is feasible and highly acceptable among experienced mental health professionals. The findings are promising and warrant larger, controlled trials to assess impacts on training effectiveness and patient outcomes.
<img src="https://jmir-production.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/thumbs/662a4ae716b1ea24241b30b661b4ecb7" />

Anorexia Prevention in Female College Students

Conditions: Eating Disorder Risk; Body Shape Concern

Interventions: Behavioral: Acceptance-Based Embodied Movement; Behavioral: Functional Fitness Control; Behavioral: Psychoeducation

Sponsors: Jinan University Guangzhou

Completed

The effect of weather on unscheduled healthcare utilisation for mental health conditions in England, 2014–2022

BackgroundWeather conditions have been linked to adverse mental health outcomes, and rising concern about climate change has increased interest in these associations. However, most existing research focuses on extreme weather events, such as heatwaves, or on acute clinical outcomes, such as suicide. Evidence is more limited regarding population-level variations in mental health–related healthcare utilisation across the full range of daily weather conditions.ObjectiveTo examine associations between daily weather conditions and unscheduled mental health–related healthcare contacts in England using large-scale national surveillance data.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective observational study across nine English regions from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2022. Outcomes were daily counts of unscheduled mental health–related contacts to emergency departments (EDs), general practice out-of-hours (GP OOH) services, and the NHS 111 telephone advice line. Weather exposures included mean daily temperature (°C), hours of full sunshine, and total daily rainfall (mm). Associations were estimated using distributed lag non-linear models at regional level and combined through two-stage multivariate meta-analysis. Models were adjusted for seasonality, long-term trends, day of week, public holidays, and population size.ResultsMental health–related unscheduled healthcare contacts showed modest but consistent associations with temperature and sunshine. Across services, relative risks (demand) increased with rising temperatures up to around 18 °C and were higher on days with fewer hours of sunshine. Sunshine demonstrated the clearest pattern, with increased utilisation on low-sunshine days across all healthcare settings. Rainfall was not consistently associated with healthcare contacts. Age-stratified analyses showed a U-shaped relationship between temperature and ED attendances among adults aged over 64 years, with higher utilisation during both colder and warmer conditions. Overall variations in daily healthcare demand were modest, typically within ±10–20% of baseline levels.ConclusionIn England, short-term variations in temperature and sunshine are associated with changes in unscheduled mental health–related healthcare utilisation, whereas rainfall shows little consistent effect. Although effect sizes were modest, these findings highlight the role of everyday weather conditions in influencing mental health–related healthcare demand and may support planning and preparedness efforts for mental health services under current and future climate conditions.

Treating ADHD With Methylphenidate (Ritalin, Concerta)

Methylphenidate is a stimulant medication used to treat symptoms of ADHD. It helps the brain regulate attention, focus, and impulsive behaviors.

It’s one of the two stimulants widely used in ADHD medications. Methylphenidate is the active ingredient in Ritalin and Concerta, among others. The other commonly used stimulant, amphetamine, is the active ingredient in Adderall and Vyvanse, among others. Both stimulants work by increasing levels of dopamine and norepinephrine, chemicals in the brain that control attention, focus, and impulsivity. If a child doesn’t do well on the first stimulant medication they try, they may respond better to a different formulation of that type or the other type of stimulant.

How is methylphenidate different from amphetamine?

Methylphenidate is somewhat less powerful than amphetamine and tends to have milder side effects.

If your child is under 12 and has just been diagnosed with ADHD, a doctor is likely to prescribe a methylphenidate medication first, to see how well the medication reduces their ADHD symptoms, and whether the side effects are problematic.

Methylphenidate is also many doctors’ first choice for younger children because it has been used to treat ADHD much longer than amphetamine. Ritalin (methylphenidate-based) was FDA approved in 1955, while Adderall (amphetamine-based) wasn’t approved until 1996. In countries outside the United States, amphetamine-based ADHD medications are less widely approved than those based on methylphenidate.

How methylphenidate works vs amphetamine

The two stimulants target the same brain chemicals but work slightly differently, says Paul Mitrani, MD, PhD, a child and adolescent psychiatrist at the Child Mind Institute. Methylphenidate increases the levels of dopamine and norepinephrine by blocking what’s called reuptake — the process by which nerve cells reabsorb these chemicals after they’ve been released. As Dr. Mitrani describes it, methylphenidate “enhances” the norepinephrine and dopamine the brain naturally releases by making the chemicals stay around longer. It boosts the stimulation the brain is already getting from whatever activity the child is engaged in.

Amphetamine, on the other hand, not only blocks reuptake but stimulates the release of more dopamine and norepinephrine, which is why it’s considered stronger. “Adding stimulation with amphetamine sometimes helps,” he notes. “But sometimes that added stimulation is too much, and it increases side effects the child experiences.”

Kids vary in how they respond to methylphenidate vs amphetamine

There is individual variation in how children respond to the two stimulants. So if methylphenidate doesn’t give the desired symptom relief or produces problematic side effects, it’s recommended practice to try amphetamine, or vice versa. Research shows that 70 percent of children with ADHD respond to a trial of methylphenidate. More than 90 percent will have a beneficial response to one of the stimulants if both methylphenidate and amphetamine are tried. Studies also show that approximately 41 percent respond equally well to both types of stimulant.

Children can also vary in their response to different formulations of the same stimulant, which affect the rate at which the medication goes into the bloodstream.  For instance, a short-acting form of Ritalin will kick in quickly and last for 3-4 hours, while Concerta, a delayed-release formula, lasts as long as 10-12 hours. It’s very common for kids to try several before finding the best fit.

What are the side effects of stimulant medications?

Methylphenidate and amphetamine have the same side effects, though they may be less intense with the former.

Appetite suppression

The most common side effect of stimulants is appetite suppression. It can be especially concerning with long-acting forms of the medication, which are often preferred to get better coverage through the school day. Kids who take a long-acting stimulant in the morning tend to lose their appetite for lunch and may not be interested in eating until after dinnertime.

When this is a problem, Dr. Mitrani notes that taking a shorter-acting form of the medication can help. “For instance, Concerta is a methylphenidate medication that lasts for a long time and can suppress appetite for 10–12 hours.” An alternative might be a medication that lasts for 6–8 hours, such as Metadate CD or Ritalin LA. Some children with more pronounced problems with appetite will do better on a short-acting dose in the morning and then another after lunch, he adds, since it gives them a break during the day where they can eat better.

Sleep issues

Kids who take stimulant medication can have trouble falling asleep. This can happen when a long-acting medication or an afternoon dose of a short-acting medication wears off and they get restless or hyperactive around bedtime. Difficulty falling asleep can get better after a few weeks, but if it doesn’t, it may be helpful to change either the timing or the type of the medication that is given. It’s also important to explore whether there are other contributors to sleep challenges, such as worry, screen time too close to bedtime, or lack of a consistent evening routine that helps kids calm down.

Irritability

Stimulant medications can generate agitation and irritability, which can be especially problematic in kids who are already anxious. For children with anxiety, this can be another reason to start treatment with methylphenidate, because amphetamines can feel more activating.

But Dr. Mitrani notes that treating ADHD can also reduce anxiety: “Some kids are so stressed about school — because they can’t pay attention or arealways getting in trouble — that when you treat the ADHD, they are better able to manage the demands of school and become less anxious.”

That reduction in school anxiety can also affect what happens when they get home from school. “When there is anxiety, it’s like kids are holding it together at school, and then they come home after a stressful day and just let it out,” he says. “So if the school day is less stressful, you may also see that come down at the end of the day.”

Mood changes

Some children report that stimulant medications seem to dull their personality. Dr. Mitrani suggests that this may be connected to the medication stimulating the prefrontal cortex, the part of the brain that not only manages attention and focus, but also helps regulate emotions and impulse control in other brain areas. “Enhanced control of the emotional part of the brain can cause this feeling of dullness,” he notes. “Some people will even say they feel depressed, that they’re just not like themselves because they don’t have the same energy or personality.”

If this happens to a child on methylphenidate, Dr. Mitrani will recommend trying an amphetamine or a non-stimulant medication.

Rebound effects

Some families report that their child is irritable or emotional after school or at the end of the day, when the stimulant medication is wearing off. Dr. Mitrani notes that this can coincide with the child being hungry after missing lunch. It can also be connected to the medication level dropping too quickly, and strategies that create a more gradual decrease may help take it away. For example, he might suggest adding a small dose of  short-acting form of the stimulant a half hour before the morning medication wears off.

Starting children on methylphenidate

Dr. Mitrani usually starts a child on a short-acting form of methylphenidate for two reasons: as a quick test to see if the child will experience side effects and to have an opportunity to try it twice in a day, to have more chances to assess for positive changes.

He recommends starting the medication on a weekend or a break from school and giving the child some tasks that are challenging for them because of their ADHD, like reading or something else that requires concentration, such as cleaning their room or doing household chores. “After lunch you want to try it again, to have another time point to check on. Because if you only give one dose of the medication, you don’t know if the child’s behavior was a result of the medication or some other factor. The more data points that we have, or more trials, the more information we get.”

He recommends keeping the child on short-acting doses for at least several days before trying a longer-acting formula.

Starting children on a low dose

Practice guidelines for psychiatrists recommend starting children on a low dose to assess any side effects the child might experience and gradually increasing it over 1-2 weeks with careful monitoring of response until you reach the minimum dose that will give the best symptom relief.

There is a great deal of variation in how children respond to these medications, so starting with an “average” effective dose, even adjusted by body weight, would be under-medicating some kids and overmedicating others.

For instance, for a 6- or 7-year-old child, a common starting dose of a short-acting medication might be about 2.5 mg, going up to 5 mg if more is needed for symptom relief and side effects are not an issue, Dr. Mitrani says. 

Liquid versions of either stimulant have an advantage when it comes to getting exactly the right dose, he notes: “You can do, 1 milliliter, 1.5, 1.6, depending on the syringe.”

Long-acting formulations that come in capsules can be especially frustrating, he adds — since they come in set doses and can’t be opened and divided effectively, because the beads inside are made to be triggered at different time periods.

Trying different formulations

Dr. Mitrani stresses that small differences in the formulation of a medication can make a difference in a child’s reaction.

For instance, Focalin (dexmethylphenidate) is a refined form of methylphenidate. Standard methylphenidate medications contain two mirror-image forms, or isomers, but most of the benefit comes from one of them. Focalin contains only this more active isomer. For some children, it works better, causes fewer side effects, or feels smoother.

He also notes that variations in the release patterns among long-acting formulations can affect a child’s experience. “Take Concerta, which has a unique mechanism for the extended release,” he explains. “There are three phases: a really immediate phase, then a regular Ritalin kind of phase and, then a slow extrusion of the remaining methylphenidate throughout the day that helps it last as long as 12 hours.”

By contrast, he describes Ritalin LA, which tends to last for 6-8 hours, as “50-50” — 50 percent of the dose is immediate released and the other half is delayed release. Other formulations are “40-60” or “30-70.” “These subtle differences can result in some kids responding better to one than the other, while other kids can do well on any of them.”

So even within the methylphenidate group, there may be reason to try a child on number of different formulations to get the best fit. And, of course, other reasons for trying different versions are limits on what insurance covers —which can change suddenly — and what’s available because of shortages. “And that can be really frustrating for families,” he says. “What I hear is, ‘My child was on Concerta or on Metadate CD and they made me switch to this one and now my kid’s not doing as well.’ “


When families cannot get a medication that has been working, finding another medication that’s available, that’s effective, and that insurance will approve can be a lot of hoops to jump through, he adds.

The post Treating ADHD With Methylphenidate (Ritalin, Concerta) appeared first on Child Mind Institute.