The purpose of this review is to identify evidence in herbal therapy in the treatment of ADHD concerning effectiveness and drug tolerability.
For this Medline/PubMed, Scopus and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Central) were searched from their inception to 15 July 2016. Only randomized controlled trails (RCT) with children (0-18years) suffering from ADHD were included in this review.
Nine RCTs with 464 patients comparing herbal pharmaceuticals to placebo or active control were included. Seven different herbs were tested in the treatment of ADHD symptoms. Low evidence could be found for Melissa officinalis, Valeriana officinalis and Passiflora incarnata. Limited evidence could be found for pine bark extract and Gingko biloba. The other herbal preparations showed no efficacy in the treatment of ADHD symptoms.
While there is still a lack of sufficient numbers of RCTs no concrete recommendations for use can be made so far.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
21
12%
Nursing and Health Professions
19
11%
Psychology
11
6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences
6
3%
Other
23
13%
Unknown
71
39%
Attention Score in Context
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 31 December 2023.
All research outputs
#2,255,269
of 34,140,750 outputs
Outputs from Complementary Therapies in Medicine
#347
of 1,831 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,314
of 453,628 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Complementary Therapies in Medicine
#6
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,140,750 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,831 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 453,628 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
