Dear readers of, please forgive the disruption. needs about $12450 in 2022. In 2022 we received donations from third parties of $7671 until 08/31. Unfortunately, 99.7% of our readers do not donate. If everyone who reads this request makes a small contribution, our fundraising campaign for 2022 would be over after a few days. This donation request is displayed 4,000 times a week, but only 19 people donate. If you find useful, please take a minute and support with your donation. Thank you!

Since 01.06.2021 is supported by the non-profit ADxS e.V..

$7671 of $12450 - as of 2022-09-02
Header Image
Effect size of different forms of treatment for ADHD


Effect size of different forms of treatment for ADHD

The effect size of a treatment is the value by which the symptomatology improves.

The highest effect in the treatment of ADHD is shown by drugs (especially stimulants).
Behavioral therapy alone is not as effective as medication alone over many years.
A combination of medication and intensive behavioral therapy did not perform significantly better than medication alone in the MTA study of n = 579 children aged 7 to 9 years.12 For impulsive-aggressive symptomatology and emotional disturbance, medication and behavior therapy were equally effective.3 A more recent comprehensive metastudy of 190 studies involving 26,114 participants with ADHD-HI found similar results.4

Medications during therapy have been reported to increase the learning efficacy of therapy.5 It is our understanding that in many cases they establish therapy efficacy in the first place, because stimulants eliminate the dopamine deficit and thus restore the neurotrophic effect of dopamine required for learning ability to support brain plasticity. Neurophysiological correlates of learning problems in ADHD

In ADHD, medication is only effective for as long as it is given. Therapy, environmental intervention and psychoeducation, on the other hand, have a long-term effect. Therapies have an effect beyond their specific application.

The effect sizes6 and SMD (standard mean difference) values7 mentioned in this article are not directly comparable with each other, especially since they were mostly determined using different methods. Nevertheless, the data provide an approximate picture for comparing effectiveness.

1. Effectiveness intensity of the treatment methods

The different treatment options have different efficacies.
The higher the value, the more effectively the treatment improves ADHD symptoms.

1.1. Effectiveness of medication in ADHD

Effect only while taking medication.

1.1.1. Comparison by effect size

For effect size, positive values are better. Methylphenidate: 0.9 to 1.1
  • 0.9 MPH total8, according to less reliable source 1.3 to 1.699
  • Methylphenidate with immediate effect (unretarded)
    • Ritalin, MPH Hexal: 1.0110
    • Equasym: 1.0910
  • Methylphenidate sustained release: 1.0810
    • Concerta: 1.3510
    • Medikinet retard: 0.9510
      The better tolerability/efficacy of Concerta compared to Medikinet reported in the studies is consistent with our experience.
  • According to symptoms
    • Inattention on average approx. 0.811
    • Hyperactivity: on average approx. 1.011
  • One metastudy found only a moderate effect size.12 This is not consistent with general experience in practice. Amphetamine drugs: 1.1 to 1.5
  • Amphetamine drugs total
    • Approx. 1.1 AMP total11
    • 1.07 in European adults (lisdexamfetamine drugs; metastudy of 22 studies)13
    • For inattention: 1.5 (lisdexamfetamine medication, but only one examination)11
    • For hyperactivity: approx. 1.2 (total amphetamine drugs)11
  • Lisdexamfetamine showed the best effect size in a metastudy, significantly better than amphetamine salts and methylphenidate.12 Another study came to comparable results for Adderall (amphetamine salts).14
  • In MPH nonresponders, lisdexamfetamine and atomoxetine were compared in a randomized double-blind trial with n = 200 subjects. Lisdexamfetamine was significantly more effective than atomoxetine in 2 of 6 categories and in the overall assessment.15
  • Adderall XR
    (mixture of dexamphetamine and levoamphetamine in the ratio 3:1)
    • For children: 0.8516
    • For adults: 0.7516 Total non-stimulants (meta-analysis) 0.71

Total non-stimulants (meta-analysis) 0.7116 Guanfacine: 0.76

Guanfacine: 0.7617
In one study, guanfacine alone (at least 50% symptom reduction in 68% of subjects) was shown to be inferior to methylphenidate alone (at least 50% symptom reduction in 81% of subjects). However, a combination medication of MPH and guanfacine was most successful (symptom reduction of at least 50% in 91% of sufferers).18 Atomoxetine: 0.68
  • Atomoxetine 0.6816 Modafinil: 0.65
  • Modafinil 0.6516
  • In contrast, another metastudy found no symptom improvement with modafinil. However, this study also differed significantly from real-world experience with respect to MPH.12

1.1.2. Comparison according to SMD

A large metastudy evaluating 133 studies with a total of 10,068 children and 8,131 adults determined the following efficacy values (in SMD; negative values are better):

  • Amphetamine drugs: -1.02 (from -1.19 to -0.85)19
  • Methylphenidate: -0.8 (from -0.93 to -0.62)19
  • Atomoxetine: -0.56 (from -0.66 to -0.45)19
  • Modafinil: -0.56 (from -0.66 to -0.45)19

In adults alone, the following efficacy values were found (in SMD, negative values are better)

  • Amphetamine drugs: -0.79 (from -0.99 to -0.58)19 which is consistent with other publications2021
  • Methylphenidate: -0.49 (from -0.64 to -0.35)19
  • Bupropion: -0.46 (from -0.85 to -0.07, i.e., a very wide range of variation)19
  • Atomoxetine: -0.45 (from -0.58 to -0.32)19
  • Modafinil: 0.16 (from -0.28 to 0.59)19
    • The positive value for modafinil means a worse effect than placebo in adults.

1.1.3. Compatibility

The compatibility was also analyzed.
Positive values mean: worse tolerated than placebo.

  • Amphetamine drugs
    • In children (2.30 odds ratio [OR], 95% CI 1.36 to 3.89)19
    • In adults (3.26, 1.54 to 6.92)19
  • Guanfacine in children and adults (2.64, 1.20 to 5.81)19
  • Atomoxetine (2.33, 1.28 to 4.25)19
  • Methylphenidate (2.39, 1.40 to 4.08)19
  • Modafinil (4.01, 1.42 to 11.33)19

1.2. Effectiveness of non-drug therapies for ADHD (effect size)

Efficacy expressed in effect size. Positive values are better.

1.2.1. Sports (endurance training): approx. 0.8 to 1

By effect size (positive values are better):

  • 0.93 according to a meta-review of 5 studies with a total of 144 subjects22 Unfortunately, no comparison was made on the effect size of medication.
  • An aerobic group exercise program produced improvements in participants with various disorders compared to the passive control group in terms of:23
    • Global symptom severity: 0.77
    • Depression; 0.68
    • Anxiety: 0.87
    • Sleep quality: 0.88

According to SMD (negative values are better):

  • -0.65 SMD (mean). One meta-study found moderate effect sizes of endurance training in children with ADHD. Data in SMD, (more negative is stronger):24
    • Attention (-0.84)
    • Anxiety symptoms (-0.66)
    • Executive functions (-0.58)
    • Social disorders (-0.59)
    • Hyperactivity (-0.56)
    • Impulsivity (-0.56)
  • -0.62 (SMD) A Cochrane meta-analysis of 35 studies on the effect of exercise training on depression found an SMD (more negative is stronger) of -0.62 (35 studies with 1356 participants comparing endurance training against controls) and a long-term effect of -0.33. However, when only the studies with high blinding were evaluated, the SMD decreased to a barely relevant -0.18. The comparative studies on the effect size of psychotherapy (7 studies, n = 189) or medication (4 studies, n = 300) each found an identical SMD of endurance training.25

1.2.2. Behavioral therapy: 0.69 to 1

  • Without concurrent medication
    • 1,026
    • 0.69 according to a meta-review of 3 studies with a total of 107 subjects22 Unfortunately, no comparison was made on the effect size of medication.
    • A large metastudy of 190 studies involving 26,114 participants with ADHD-HI found that stimulants were more effective than behavior therapy, cognitive training, or non-stimulants. Stimulants in combination with behavioral therapy appeared to be most effective.4
  • With concomitant medication: 1.726
  • Effect remains largely after end of therapy
  • Duration until onset of action very long

1.2.3. Neurofeedback: 0.8 (0.39 to 1.2)

  • 0,62728
  • 0.49 to 0.68 after only 30 sessions9
  • 0.61 according to a meta-review of 6 studies with a total of 203 subjects22 Unfortunately, no comparison was made on the effect size of medication.
  • To attention: 0.8 to 1.2
    • 0,826
    • After 40 sessions: 1.226
  • On impulsivity: 0.68
    • After 20 sessions: 0.726
    • Cannot be improved further by increasing the number of meetings
  • On hyperactivity: 0.39
    • Cannot be improved further by increasing the number of meetings
  • Neurofeedback is not as effective as MPH.29
    • MPH showed a symptom improvement of 46.9% (SMD 2.03) in one study, whereas neurofeedback produced a symptom improvement of 26.7% (SMD 0.89).30
  • Effect usually remains completely after the end of therapy

1.2.4. Parent training 0.65

A single study of a particular training for parents of children with ADHD found an improvement in problematic behavior of 0.6 to 0.7. Because the data collection was done through self-report questionnaires by parents, a substantial bias toward elevated scores is likely to be expected.31

1.2.5. Cognitive training 0.45

  • 0.45 according to a meta-survey of 4 studies with a total of 159 subjects.22 Unfortunately, no comparison was made on the effect size of medication.

1.2.6. Elimination diet: 0.45 (0.12 to 0.8)

  • 0,2932
    Effect only during error-free diet compliance
  • 0.51 to 0.833

There is evidence that an elimination diet only works for certain affected individuals (“subgroup”).34

1.2.7. Elimination of food supplements / colorants: 0.2 (0.08 to 0.44)

  • 0.08 to 0.11 (teacher and observer rating)33
  • 0.12 to 0.2532
  • 0.21 to 0.283 (if smaller, lower-quality studies are also added)35
  • 0.21 to 0.44 in parent rating33
  • Effect only during error-free diet compliance

1.2.8. PUFA supplementation: 0.16

  • 0.16 to 0.17 in parent and teacher rating33

1.2.7. Mindfulness-Based Behavior Therapy (MBCT)

ADHD sufferers who were additionally treated with MBCT (Mindfullness based cognitive therapy, a mindfulness-based behavioral therapy) showed a significantly greater reduction in ADHD symptoms [M difference = -3.44 (-5.75, -1.11), p = 0.004, d = 0.41]. This effect was maintained until the 6-month follow-up. Of those additionally treated with MBCT, 27% showed a 30% reduction in ADHD-HI symptoms (p = 0.001), compared with only 4% of ADHD subjects not additionally treated with MBCT.36
The effect largely persisted after the end of therapy.

1.2.8. Multimodal therapy

In the Multimodal Treatment Study of Children with ADHD (MTA study) in the late 1990s, 579 children ages 7 to 10 were treated for 14 months with medication, cognitive behavioral therapy, or both.
Teachers and parents rated the symptom reduction with regard to the core symptoms of ADHD better in the group of children treated with medication only than in the group of children treated with behavior therapy only. The children who received medication and behavioral therapy still did a little better than the children treated with medication only. When not only the core symptoms but all symptoms were considered, the children treated with medication and cognitive behavioral therapy clearly did best. In contrast, the effect of behavioral therapy alone was lower than treatment with medication alone.2

2. Effectiveness latency of the treatment forms

By efficacy latency, we mean how long it takes for a treatment to produce an effect.

  • Medication
    • Stimulants: immediately effective, fully effective immediately when optimally adjusted
    • Norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors: 2-3 weeks of flare-up phase
    • Atomoxetine: several weeks to 6 months of tarnish phase
  • Therapy
    • Behavioral therapy: several months for first steps, 3 years for adequate treatment effect
    • Neurofeedback: several months for first steps, 6 to 15 months for adequate treatment effect

3. Effectiveness object of the treatment forms

By efficacy object, we mean what symptoms each treatment modifies.

3.1. Medication

  • Stimulants
    • Attention
    • Hyperactivity
    • Impulsivity (MPH more than amphetamine medication)
    • Internal pressure
    • Emotional dysregulation
      • Mood swings / affect stability
      • Aggression/fearfulness
      • Dysphoria (predominantly amphetamine medications, but MPH less so)
  • Non-stimulants
    • Impulsivity
      e.g. low doses of SSRIs
    • Emotional regulation
    • Attention
  • Norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors
    • Impulsivity
    • Depression
    • Mood swings / affect stability
    • Hyperactivity

3.2. Therapy

  • Behavioral therapy
    • Cognitive VT:
      Self-esteem, social behavior, stress reduction
      To some extent also change in stress processing including hormonal and immunological physical change37
    • Mindfulness-based VT:
      Attention, empathy, stress reduction
  • Mindfulness Training:
    Alteration of stress perception; alteration of stress processing in the CNS, impulsivity
    Improved perception of pleasant aspects causes immediate changes in the dopaminergic focusing and reinforcement system. Perceptions of the nature of an individual’s spatial environment and (permanently) a high social rank have the same effect.38
    However, whether these changes (with the exception of social rank) have a lasting influence, which is a prerequisite for therapeutic use, or only activation occurs during perception in each case is unclear.
  • Neurofeedback:
    Attention; impulsivity; hyperactivity, relaxation, sleep
  • Environment Interventions:
    Elimination of stressors through elimination of stressors and greater understanding of the environment
  • Psychoeducation:
    Elimination of stressors and better ability to regulate due to greater understanding of the affected person
    Self-esteem enhancement through the feeling of coming home, meeting and exchanging with other affected people

4. Efficacy duration of the treatment forms

4.1. Early medication

There is an indication that methylphenidate treatment at 2 mg/kg/day in very young rats caused a permanent reduction of dopamine transporters in the striatum (which would correspond to a permanent curative effect), whereas methylphenidate administration in slightly older animals (“after puberty”) no longer did so.39 These results could not be reproduced so far.

In the treatment of humans, no permanent reduction of DAT in the striatum is known even in children before puberty with MPH. Either an application in humans is required at even much earlier ages or the - compared to the postulated maximum dose of 1 mg / kg / day in children - significantly increased dosage (here 2 mg / kg) causes as yet unexplored effects.

Despite the immense importance of this issue, no other studies on this subject are known to confirm the results. At a dosage of even two times 5 mg / kg / day in rats from the 7th day until the 35th day after birth, short-term reductions in the number of DAT were observed, but these were no longer found on the 135th day of life.40
What part the massively increased dosage plays in this is an open question.
Structural changes in brain structures were not found immediately after the end of treatment on day 35, nor on day 135.40 Considering the extreme dosage, this also proves a low hazard of MPH.

4.2. Short term medication

The improvements with drug treatment end (at least with stimulants) immediately with the end of drug administration, with other drugs with a mirror effect at the latest after approx. 14 days.
Learning effects with neurofeedback and behavioral therapy are better with medication administration.
The efficacy of non-drug therapy is long-lasting; however, sufficiently long and intensive therapy (6 months to 3 years) is required.
With neurofeedback, persistence of treatment effects was noted as late as 6 months after the end of treatment541 Kühle observed that treatment effects persisted years later in some cases and not in others.

4.3. Long term medication

There is evidence that longer-term medication may cause post-maturation of those brain structures that are affected by developmental delay in ADHD.

In ADHD, dysfunctional executive functions are associated with a decreased amount of brain matter in the cortex.42 In children with AD(HHD), brain matter growth in the cortex is significantly reduced, with the greatest delays in the PFC and ACC.42
Adult ADHD sufferers treated with stimulants have a significantly larger brain mass in the relevant brain regions than adult ADHD sufferers not treated with stimulants.43 This could indicate that treatment with stimulants can catch up or compensate for the developmental delay.42
In ADHD patients, who still showed full ADHD symptoms as adults, no post maturation (i.e. growth) of the brain mass in the relevant brain regions was detectable.44

4.4. Multimodal treatment: non-drug therapy and medication

There is evidence that dopaminergic ADHD medications-in particular, D-amphetamine medications in the study (levodopa, also mentioned, is not suitable as an ADHD medication)-may increase neuroplasticity and thus increase the success of psychotherapy.45

We are convinced that psychotherapeutic measures are significantly less effective in ADHD patients who are not medicated, since the learning and receptive ability is massively reduced by ADHD itself. In our opinion, the establishment of a learning and receptive ability through medication is therefore clearly recommended for successful psychotherapy and is in the interest of reducing and discontinuing medication as soon as possible after successful psychotherapeutic treatment.

Apart from this, psychotherapy makes little sense if the patient does not even know what the state feels like that he is supposed to achieve through therapy. This feeling can only be conveyed to the patient after a longer period (1 year or more) of properly adjusted medication.
This is especially true for ADHD sufferers, since ADHD changes motivation in the direction of a significantly increased intrinsic control. ADHD involves precisely the fact that compliance with extrinsic requests is massively impeded.

  1. Edel, Vollmoeller (2006): Aufmerksamkeitsdefizit-/Hyperaktivitätsstörung bei Erwachsenen, Springer Seite 55

  2. Müller, Candrian, Kropotov (2011): ADHS – Neurodiagnostik in der Praxis, Springer, Seite 23

  3. Edel, Vollmoeller (2006): Aufmerksamkeitsdefizit-/Hyperaktivitätsstörung bei Erwachsenen, Springer, Seite 55

  4. Catalá-López, Hutton, Núñez-Beltrán, Page, Ridao, Macías Saint-Gerons, Catalá, Tabarés-Seisdedos, Moher (2017): The pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents: A systematic review with network meta-analyses of randomised trials. PLoS One. 2017 Jul 12;12(7):e0180355. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0180355. PMID: 28700715; PMCID: PMC5507500. METASTUDIE

  5. Strehl et al (2013): Neurofeedback, Kohlhammer

  6. Psychometrica: Effektstärke

  7. SMD bei Cochrane

  8. Faraone et al (2004), Biedermann et al (2006), Biedermann et al (2007), zitiert nach Safren, Perlman: Kognitive Verhaltenstherapie des ADHS des Erwachsenenalters, Seite 9

  9. Sudnawa, Chirdkiatgumchai, Ruangdaraganon, Khongkhatithum, Udomsubpayakul, Jirayucharoensak, Israsena (2018): Effectiveness of Neurofeedback Versus Medication in Treatment of ADHD. Pediatr Int. 2018 Jun 22. doi: 10.1111/ped.13641., n = 40

  10. Metaanalyse einer hoher Anzahl von Studien durch Taylor (Eric), European guidelines on diagnosis and treatment of ADHD, Vortrag auf dem internationalen Symposium in Achen, 14.03.2007, zitiert nach Kühle, Dr. med. Hans-Jürgen, Neurofeedbacktherapie bei ADHS, Giessen 2010 (PDF von Webseite Dr. Kühle, Download August 2015), Kapitel 4

  11. Faraone, Buitelaar (2010): Comparing the efficacy of stimulants for ADHD in children and adolescents using meta-analysis; European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry; April 2010, Volume 19, Issue 4, pp 353–364, Metaanalyse

  12. Stuhec, Lukić, Locatelli (2018): Efficacy, Acceptability, and Tolerability of Lisdexamfetamine, Mixed Amphetamine Salts, Methylphenidate, and Modafinil in the Treatment of Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Ann Pharmacother. 2018 Aug 17:1060028018795703. doi: 10.1177/1060028018795703. n = 701

  13. Fridman, Hodgkins, Kahle, Erder (2015): Predicted effect size of lisdexamfetamine treatment of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in European adults: Estimates based on indirect analysis using a systematic review and meta-regression analysis; Eur Psychiatry. 2015 Jun;30(4) :521-7. doi: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2015.01.001.

  14. Pelham, Aronoff, Midlam, Shapiro, Gnagy, Chronis, Onyango, Forehand, Nguyen, Waxmonsky (1999): A comparison of ritalin and adderall: efficacy and time-course in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Pediatrics. 1999 Apr;103(4):e43.

  15. Nagy, Häge, Coghill, Caballero, Adey, Anderson, Sikirica, Cardo (2015): Functional outcomes from a head-to-head, randomized, double-blind trial of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate and atomoxetine in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and an inadequate response to methylphenidate.Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2016 Feb;25(2):141-9. doi: 10.1007/s00787-015-0718-0.

  16. Metaanalyse einer hoher Anzahl von Studien durch Taylor (Eric), European guidelines on diagnosis and treatment of ADHD, Vortrag auf dem internationalen Symposium in Achen, 14.03.2007, zitiert nach Kühle, Dr. med. Hans-Jürgen, Neurofeedbacktherapie bei ADHS, Giessen 2010 (PDF von Webseite Dr. Kühle, Download Februar 2018), Kapitel 7


  18. McCracken, McGough, Loo, Levitt, Del’Homme, Cowen, Sturm, Whelan, Hellemann, Sugar, Bilder (2018): Combined Stimulant and Guanfacine Administration in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Controlled, Comparative Study. Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2016 Aug; 55(8): 657–666.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jaac.2016.05.015; PMCID: PMC4976782; NIHMSID: NIHMS800851; PMID: 27453079

  19. Cortese, Adamo, Del Giovane, Mohr-Jensen, Hayes, Carucci, Atkinson, Tessari, Banaschewski, Coghill, Hollis, Simonoff, Zuddas, Barbui, Purgato, Steinhausen, Shokraneh, Xia, Cipriani (2018): Comparative efficacy and tolerability of medications for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder in children, adolescents, and adults: a systematic review and network meta-analysis; The Lancet Psychiatry, VOLUME 5, ISSUE 9, P727-738, SEPTEMBER 01, 2018; Open Access; DOI:

  20. Maneeton, Maneeton, Suttajit, Reungyos, Srisurapanont, Martin (2014): Exploratory meta-analysis on lisdexamfetamine versus placebo in adult ADHD; Drug Des Devel Ther. 2014; 8: 1685–1693. doi: 10.2147/DDDT.S68393; PMCID: PMC4199984

  21. Kooij, Bijlenga, Salerno, Jaeschke, Bitter, Balázs, Thome, Dom, Kasper, Filipe, Stes, Mohr, Leppämäki, Brugué, Bobes, Mccarthy, Richarte, Philipsen, Pehlivanidis, Niemela, Styr, Semerci, Bolea-Alamanac, Edvinsson, Baeyens, Wynchank, Sobanski, Philipsen, McNicholas, Caci, Mihailescu, Manor, Dobrescu, Krause, Fayyad, Ramos-Quiroga, Foeken, Rad, Adamou, Ohlmeier, Fitzgerald, Gill, Lensing, Mukaddes, Brudkiewicz, Gustafsson, Tania, Oswald, Carpentier, De Rossi, Delorme, Simoska, Pallanti, Young, Bejerot, Lehtonen, Kustow, Müller-Sedgwick, Hirvikoski, Pironti, Ginsberg, Félegeházy, Garcia-Portilla, Asherson (2018): Updated European Consensus Statement on diagnosis and treatment of adult ADHD, European Psychiatrie, European Psychiatry 56 (2019) 14–34,, Seite 22, 7.4.3.

  22. Lambez, Harwood-Gross, Golumbic, Rassovsky (2019): Non-pharmacological interventions for cognitive difficulties in ADHD: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Psychiatr Res. 2019 Oct 12;120:40-55. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2019.10.007.

  23. Zeibig, Seiffer, Sudeck, Rösel, Hautzinger, Wolf (2021): Transdiagnostic efficacy of a group exercise intervention for outpatients with heterogenous psychiatric disorders: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Psychiatry. 2021 Jun 22;21(1):313. doi: 10.1186/s12888-021-03307-x. PMID: 34158000; PMCID: PMC8218400. n = 74

  24. Cerrillo‐Urbina, García‐Hermoso, Sánchez‐López, Pardo‐Guijarro, Santos Gómez, Martínez‐Vizcaíno (2015): The effects of physical exercise in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized control trials. Child: Care, Health and Development, 41: 779– 788. doi: 10.1111/cch.12255. 8 Studien, n = 249

  25. Cooney, Dwan, Greig, Lawlor, Rimer, Waugh, McMurdo, Mead (2013): Exercise for depression. Cochrane Systematic Review – Intervention Version.

  26. Kühle, Dr. med. Hans-Jürgen, Neurofeedbacktherapie bei ADHS, Giessen 2010 (PDF von Webseite Dr. Kühle, Download Februar 2018), Kapitel 4

  27. Gevensleben, Holl, Albrecht, Vogel, Schlamp, Kratz, Studer, Rothenberger, Moll, Heinrich (2009): Is neurofeedback an efficacious treatment for ADHD? A randomised controlled clinical trial. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2009 Jul;50(7):780-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2008.02033.x. n = 102

  28. Gevensleben (2012): Neurofeedback­-Training bei Kindern mit einer Aufmerksamkeitsdefizit­/Hyperaktivitätsstörung; Effekte auf Verhaltens-­ und neurophysiologischer Ebene; Dissertation; Seite 83

  29. Yan, Wang, Yuan, Zhang (2019): Effects of neurofeedback versus methylphenidate for the treatment of ADHD: systematic review and meta-analysis of head-to-head trials. Evid Based Ment Health. 2019 Aug;22(3):111-117. doi: 10.1136/ebmental-2019-300088.

  30. Purper-Ouakil, Blasco-Fontecilla, Ros, Acquaviva, Banaschewski, Baumeister, Bousquet, Bussalb, Delhaye, Delorme, Drechsler, Goujon, Häge, Kaiser, Mayaud, Mechler, Menache, Revol, Tagwerker, Walitza, Werling, Bioulac, Brandeis (2021): Personalized at-home neurofeedback compared to long-acting methylphenidate in children with ADHD: NEWROFEED, a European randomized noninferiority trial. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2021 Jun 24. doi: 10.1111/jcpp.13462. PMID: 34165190. n = 178

  31. Foubister, Rennie, Williams (2019): Parents in Control: Parental perceptions of problem behaviors before and after attending an ADHD-specific parent-training program. J Child Adolesc Psychiatr Nurs. 2019 Nov 25. doi: 10.1111/jcap.12261.

  32. Nigg, Lewis, Edinger, Falk (2012): Meta-analysis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms, restriction diet, and synthetic food color additives. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2012 Jan;51(1):86-97.e8. doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2011.10.015.

  33. Pelsser, Frankena, Toorman, Rodrigues Pereira (2017): Diet and ADHD, Reviewing the Evidence: A Systematic Review of Meta-Analyses of Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Trials Evaluating the Efficacy of Diet Interventions on the Behavior of Children with ADHD. PLoS One. 2017 Jan 25;12(1):e0169277. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169277. PMID: 28121994; PMCID: PMC5266211. METASTUDIE

  34. Pelsser, Frankena, Toorman, Rodrigues Pereira (2020): Retrospective Outcome Monitoring of ADHD and Nutrition (ROMAN): The Effectiveness of the Few-Foods Diet in General Practice. Front Psychiatry. 2020 Mar 12;11:96. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00096. PMID: 32226397; PMCID: PMC7081264.

  35. Schab, Trinh (2004): Do artificial food colors promote hyperactivity in children with hyperactive syndromes? A meta-analysis of double-blind placebo-controlled trials; J Dev Behav Pediatr 2004;25:423–434.

  36. Janssen, Kan, Carpentier, Sizoo, Hepark, Schellekens, Donders, Buitelaar, Speckens (2018): Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy v. treatment as usual in adults with ADHD: a multicentre, single-blind, randomised controlled trial. Psychol Med. 2018 Feb 28:1-11. doi: 10.1017/S0033291718000429., n = 120


  38. Edel, Vollmoeller (2006): Aufmerksamkeitsdefizit-/Hyperaktivitätsstörung bei Erwachsenen, Springer, S. 113, mwNw

  39. Moll, Hause, Rüther, Rothenberger, Huether (2001): Early methylphenidate administration to young rats causes a persistent reduction in the density of striatal dopamine transporters. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol. 2001 Spring;11(1):15-24.

  40. Gray, Punsoni, Tabori, Melton, Fanslow, Ward, Zupan, Menzer, Rice, Drake, Romeo, Brake, Torres-Reveron, Milner (2007): Methylphenidate administration to juvenile rats alters brain areas involved in cognition, motivated behaviors, appetite, and stress. J Neurosci. 2007 Jul 4;27(27):7196-207.

  41. Strehl (2014): Hyperaktivität heilen – Interview mit Dr. Ute Strehl – FUTUREMAG – ARTE; Fernehinterview 14.06.2014; Kurzfassung

  42. Petrovic, Castellanos (2016): Top-Down Dysregulation—From ADHD to Emotional Instability; Front Behav Neurosci. 2016; 10: 70. doi: 10.3389/fnbeh.2016.00070; PMCID: PMC4876334

  43. Shaw, Sharp, Morrison, Eckstrand, Greenstein, Clasen, Evans, Rapoport (2009): Psychostimulant treatment and the developing cortex in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder; Am J Psychiatry. 2009 Jan; 166(1): 58–63. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2008.08050781

  44. Shaw, Sharp, Morrison, Eckstrand, Greenstein, Clasen, et al. (2009). Psychostimulant treatment and the developing cortex in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Am. J. Psychiatry 166, 58–63. 10.1176/appi.ajp.2008.08050781

  45. Scheidtmann (2010): Bedeutung der Neuropharmakologie für die Neuroreha – Wirkung von Medikamenten auf Motivation und Lernen; neuroreha 2010; 2-2: 80-85; DOI: 10.1055/s-0030-1254343