Cookie Preferences
By clicking, you agree to store cookies on your device to enhance navigation, analyze usage, and support marketing. More Info
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
June 19, 2025
Background:
In Iceland, treatment with ADHD medication can only be initiated by psychiatrists or pediatricians with experience in diagnosing neurodevelopmental disorders. The diagnostic evaluation is most often carried out by a psychologist or psychiatrist, and must be confirmed by a psychiatrist.
Some previous studies have suggested a small but significant increased risk of psychosis or mania associated with ADHD medication, while others have not.
Iceland has a single-payer national healthcare insurance system that tracks virtually its entire population. An Icelandic research team accessed two administrative databases with nationwide coverage – the Icelandic Prescription Medicines Register and the Icelandic Hospital Discharge Register – to explore this relationship among all adults from 2010 through 2022.
They included three categories of ADHD medications prescribed in Iceland: amphetamines, including dexamphetamine and lisdexamphetamine; methylphenidate; and atomoxetine. In Iceland, methylphenidate or atomoxetine must be prescribed and tried first before switching to lisdexamphetamine or dexamphetamine.
Method:
Diagnoses of mania or psychosis recorded in electronic health records were used to identify individuals who were admitted to a psychiatric ward within one year of starting treatment with a specific class of ADHD medication. First-onset psychosis or mania was defined as the emergence of these conditions in individuals with no prior history, diagnosis, or hospitalization for psychosis or mania.
A total of 16,125 adults began using an ADHD medication for the first time during the 13-year study period.
Methylphenidate was the most used ADHD medication among those admitted for psychosis or mania (25 out of 61; 41%), reflecting its status as the most frequently prescribed stimulant during the study period. It was followed by amphetamines (21 out of 61; 34.4%) and atomoxetine (15 out of 61; 24.6%).
Half of those hospitalized had previously received a diagnosis of substance use disorder. One in nine (11%) of those hospitalized acknowledged misuse of the type of ADHD medication they had been prescribed.
Within a year of discharge, 42 out of the 61 patients (68.9%) had been prescribed an ADHD medication again. Among those, one in four (11 out of 42; 26%) were readmitted for psychosis or mania within the following year.
The team noted, “It is concerning that most patients (68.9%) in our study resumed ADHD drug treatment within a year of hospital discharge … However, some studies have reported that the use of psychostimulants or atomoxetine to treat ADHD in individuals with psychotic disorders did not increase the risk of hospitalisation for psychosis if used concurrently with antipsychotic medication or that such use might even reduce this risk.”
Findings:
By comparison with the general population, adults initiating ADHD medications had eight times the relative risk of being admitted for psychosis or mania within the first year.
The absolute risk was low: 0.38% overall for those initiating ADHD medication. Adjusting for the general population risk of hospitalization for first-onset psychosis or mania, more than 300 patients would need to be initiated to ADHD medication to generate one hospital admission for psychosis or mania.
The team conceded, “Confounders of real-life clinical settings, such as non-disclosed ADHD drug abuse or misuse or some degree of substance abuse, may have influenced our findings.”
A further, unmentioned, limitation is that the team did not perform any of the usual adjustments for confounding variables, critically including co-occurring (comorbid) psychiatric disorders known to be common with ADHD, and likely to have a major effect on the relative risk of hospitalization.
Given the very small increase in risk along with the methodological flaws, the team’s suggestion of a “potential causal role of ADHD drugs in the development of first-onset psychosis or mania” is unsubstantiated and speculative. This is especially so given other studies suggesting no increased risk for psychosis due to these medications.
In any event, causation cannot be established through observational studies.
Ragna Kristin Gudbrandsdottir, Engilbert Sigurdsson, Þorsteinn Ivar Albertsson, Halldora Jonsdottir, and Oddur Ingimarsson, “Risk of hospitalisation for first-onset psychosis or mania within a year of ADHD medication initiation in adults with ADHD,” BMJ Mental Health (2025), 28: 1–7, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjment-2024-301521.
Antidepressants are the primary drug treatment for depressive disorders, which affect 15–20% of pregnant women. They are among the most widely prescribed medications worldwide, and their use has increased in recent decades. Understanding their reproductive safety is critical to support informed, evidence-based prescribing during pregnancy.
A new meta-analysis sheds important light on one of the most debated concerns: whether children born to mothers who took antidepressants during pregnancy face a higher risk of ADHD.
The Study:
Pooling 14 studies covering more than 14 million participants, the analysis found that prenatal antidepressant exposure was associated with a 35% higher rate of ADHD in offspring compared to no exposure. A separate look at SSRIs (the most widely prescribed class of antidepressants, including Prozac and Zoloft) across 11 studies and over four million pregnancies found an even higher apparent risk (44%) after correcting for publication bias. On the surface, these are striking numbers.
Both associations came with an important caveat: enormous variation between individual studies, a statistical red flag suggesting the results may not reflect a true underlying effect. More tellingly, the apparent risk evaporated entirely when researchers applied a more rigorous method — comparing siblings within the same family, where one child was exposed to antidepressants in the womb, and another was not.
This sibling-comparison design is particularly powerful because it automatically controls for factors that run in families: shared genes, household environment, parenting, and socioeconomic conditions. When those influences are held constant, the link between antidepressant exposure and ADHD disappears. The same pattern held for SSRIs specifically.
Two other antidepressant classes, SNRIs (serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors) and tricyclics, showed no significant association in any analysis.
“Confounding by Indication”:
The probable driver of the initial association is what researchers call confounding by indication. The very condition being treated (depression) is itself a risk factor for ADHD in offspring, independently of any medication. Mothers with more severe depression are also more likely to be prescribed antidepressants, meaning the drug and the underlying illness are difficult to disentangle in standard analyses. Sibling studies cut through this problem cleanly.
The Take-Away:
The authors concluded that the association between antidepressants and ADHD risk was non-significant across all analyses designed to account for these confounding factors. This doesn’t mean antidepressants are without any reproductive considerations, but it does suggest that ADHD risk, at least, is driven by heritable and family-level factors rather than medication exposure itself.
For clinicians and patients weighing the risks of treating or not treating depression during pregnancy, this distinction matters considerably.
Executive functions are the mental processes that allow us to plan, adapt, and follow through. This encompasses working memory, inhibitory control, cognitive flexibility, goal-directed planning, and problem-solving. In people with ADHD, weaknesses in these areas compound the disorder's core symptoms, making it substantially harder to manage complex, real-world demands.
Background:
Medication remains the frontline clinical response. Stimulant medications can meaningfully reduce both executive function deficits and ADHD symptoms, and are often combined with behavioral or psychological therapies for better overall outcomes.
Medication, however, is not entirely without risk of side effects. These risks have spurred interest in new, non-pharmacological alternatives that target the same neural pathways. One of these new therapies is Computerized Cognitive Remediation Therapy (CCRT). This therapy uses digital programs delivered via computer, tablet, or smartphone that train attention, memory, and inhibitory control through structured cognitive exercises. A key feature of many CCRT platforms is adaptive difficulty: tasks adjust in real time to match the child’s current ability, keeping training both challenging and engaging.
The Study:
Despite this promise, the evidence base in younger populations has been limited. This meta-analysis pooled results from randomized controlled trials enrolling participants under 18 who either carried an ADHD diagnosis or scored above the threshold on a validated rating scale. Comparators included no treatment (waitlist), placebo (pharmacological or psychological), or treatment as usual. The primary outcomes (overall executive function and clinical symptom severity) were assessed via questionnaires and neuropsychological testing. Studies including participants with comorbid autism, tic disorders, epilepsy, or other psychiatric conditions were excluded.
The findings were informative, but overall results were mixed. CCRT produced a small but statistically meaningful reduction in inattention symptoms across 13 studies (885 participants), with consistent results across individual trials and no evidence of publication bias. However, it had no detectable effect on hyperactivity and impulsivity (12 studies, 833 participants) or on total ADHD symptom burden (10 studies, 731 participants).
The picture was more encouraging for executive function. Nine studies (500 participants) showed small overall improvements, with specific gains in working memory (454 participants), inhibitory control (428 participants), and planning (6 studies, 335 participants). Emotional control showed no significant change (5 studies, 265 participants), nor did cognitive flexibility (4 studies, 189 participants).
The Take-Away:
Taken together, these results are modest rather than transformative, but context matters. CCRT is low-cost, digitally scalable, and carries negligible side effects. For a population where medication often comes with a significant burden of adverse reactions, even small, reliable improvements in executive function represent a meaningful clinical option.
The evidence positions CCRT not as a replacement for established treatments, but as a practical and well-tolerated addition to the therapeutic toolkit for children and adolescents with ADHD.
Methylphenidate is an effective treatment for ADHD in adults who also have bipolar disorder (BD), but it carries a potential risk of triggering manic episodes. Current guidelines therefore recommend using it only alongside mood-stabilizing medication. A new study using French nationwide claims data sought to test and extend those recommendations with greater statistical power than previous research.
The study built on findings by Viktorin et al. (2017), who observed that adults with BD not taking mood stabilizers had more than a sixfold higher risk of manic events (defined as hospitalization for mania or a new antimanic prescription) within six months of starting methylphenidate. Patients on mood-stabilizing treatment, by contrast, showed nearly half the baseline risk in the first three months. Those findings were limited, however, by small event counts (fewer than 61 manic episodes) and an effect that did not persist beyond the initial three-month window.
To build on this, researchers drew on the French National Health Data System (which is a claims database covering more than 60 million people) spanning 2008 to 2024. The final sample included 6,022 adults with BD (56% women) who had started methylphenidate. Using a self-controlled design, the study compared each patient's rate of manic events in the six months before their first methylphenidate prescription with the rate in the six months after, effectively eliminating stable individual differences as a confound.
Patients were classified as receiving continuous mood-stabilizing treatment if they had been dispensed at least two courses of specific antipsychotics (aripiprazole, olanzapine, or quetiapine) or mood stabilizers (lithium or valproate) in the nine months before starting methylphenidate, including at least one dispensation in the final six months of that window.
The results largely confirmed the earlier findings. Among the 2,745 patients not on mood stabilizers, the rate of inpatient mania diagnosis was 5.1 times higher in the first three months after starting methylphenidate, though this elevation fell to a non-significant level over the subsequent three months. Patients receiving continuous mood-stabilizing treatment showed no statistically significant change in mania risk across the full six-month post-initiation period. A formulation-specific pattern also emerged: patients without mood-stabilizing treatment had a 2.5-fold higher risk associated with extended-release methylphenidate, while no significant risk increase was seen with the immediate-release formulation or in treated patients regardless of formulation.
The authors conclude that methylphenidate at doses below 30 mg does not appear to elevate manic relapse risk when prescribed alongside mood stabilizers. The elevated risk seen in untreated patients, particularly with extended-release formulations, must be interpreted cautiously, given limited statistical power and the likelihood that it partly reflects the natural fluctuation of manic relapse over time. The authors flag this as an inherent limitation of self-controlled survival analyses when studying drug-induced mania, where temporal trends in the underlying condition can be difficult to disentangle from treatment effects.
_logo%201.svg)
