Effectiveness of Facebook Groups and Pages on Participant Recruitment Into a Randomized Controlled Trial During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Descriptive Study.

BACKGROUND: In response to the unprecedented challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, conventional recruitment approaches were halted, causing the suspension of numerous clinical trials. Previously, Facebook (Meta Platforms, Inc) has emerged as a promising tool for augmenting participant recruitment. While previous research has explored the use of Facebook for surveys and qualitative studies, its potential for recruiting participants into randomized controlled trials (RCTs) remains underexplored. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to comprehensively examine the effectiveness of using Facebook groups and pages to facilitate participant recruitment during the COVID-19 pandemic for an RCT on the effectiveness of a remote parenting program, 1-2-3 Magic, in families who have children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in the United Kingdom. METHODS: We disseminated 5 Facebook posts with an attached digital flyer across 4 prominent ADHD UK support groups and pages run by the National Attention Deficit Disorder Information and Support Services, reaching an audience of around 16,000 individuals over 2 months (January 7 to March 4, 2022). Eligibility criteria mandated participants to be parents or caregivers of a child with diagnosed ADHD aged 12 years or younger, be residing in the United Kingdom, have access to stable internet, and have a device with the Zoom (Zoom Video Communications) app. Participants were required to have never attended 1-2-3 Magic training previously. Prospective participants expressed their interest through Microsoft Forms (Microsoft Corporation). The trial aimed to recruit 84 parents. It is important to note that the term "parent" or "caregiver" in the RCT and in this study within a trial refers to anybody who has legal responsibility for the child. RESULTS: Overall, 478 individuals registered their interest through Microsoft Forms within the stipulated 2-month window. After the eligibility check, 135 participants were contacted for a baseline meeting through Zoom. The first 84 participants who attended a baseline meeting and returned a completed consent form were enrolled. Subsequently, another 16 participants were added, resulting in a final sample of 100 participants. This recruitment strategy incurred negligible expenses and demanded minimal human resources. The approach yielded favorable outcomes by efficiently attracting eligible participants in a condensed time frame, transcending geographical barriers throughout the United Kingdom, which would have been tedious to achieve through traditional recruitment methods. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience demonstrated that digital flyers posted in the targeted Facebook groups were a cost-effective and quick method for recruiting for an RCT, which opened during the COVID-19 pandemic when lockdown restrictions were in place in the United Kingdom. Trialists should consider this low-cost recruitment intervention for trials going forward, and in the case of a global pandemic, this novel recruitment method enabled the trial to continue where many have failed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) 15281572; https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN15281572.

Treatment with methylphenidate and the risk of fractures among children and young people: A systematic review and self-controlled case series study.

AIMS: Animal studies suggest that methylphenidate treatment for around 3 months may lead to less mineralized and weaker appendicular bones. A systematic review was conducted to summarize the evidence from observational studies, and a self-controlled case series study was used to compare the risk before and after treatment initiation. METHODS: Literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library to identify observational studies on methylphenidate and fractures. We also conducted a self-controlled case series study with individuals aged 5-24 years who received methylphenidate treatment and experienced fractures from 2001 to 2020 in Hong Kong. Incidence rate ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated by comparing the incidence rate in the methylphenidate-exposed period compared with nonexposed period. RESULTS: Six cohort studies and 2 case-control studies were included in the systematic review. For all-cause fractures, studies found a 39-74% lower risk in treated-attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) group compared with untreated ADHD but no difference between stimulants and nonstimulants. Differences between sexes and treatment duration were also found-significant results were shown in males and those with longer treatment duration. Among 43 841 individuals with ADHD medication before the year 2020, 2023 were included in the self-controlled case series analysis. The risks of fractures were lower by 32-41% in different treatment periods when compared with 6 months before treatment initiation. CONCLUSION: Methylphenidate treatment may lower the risk of all-cause fractures from both study designs; however, further evidence is needed about the treatment duration and sex effect. Conclusions on stress fractures are not yet established, and further research is required.

Treatment with Methylphenidate for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and the Risk of All-Cause Poisoning in Children and Adolescents: A Self-Controlled Case Series Study.

BACKGROUND: Children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are at higher risk of all-cause poisoning by drugs and chemicals (intentional or accidental). Currently, there is limited data on whether medication treatment for ADHD can reduce the risk of all-cause poisoning. METHODS: Patients aged 5-18 years with a methylphenidate (MPH) prescription and an incident poisoning diagnosis between January 2001 and June 2020 were identified from the Hong Kong Clinical Data Analysis and Reporting System. A self-controlled case series study design was used to compare the incidence rate ratios (IRRs) of all-cause poisoning during different risk windows (30 days before the first MPH prescription, exposure periods within 30 days of the first prescription, and periods of subsequent exposure) compared with the reference window (other non-exposure periods). RESULTS: 42,203 patients were prescribed ADHD medication in Hong Kong during the study period. Of these, 417 patients who had both an MPH prescription and poisoning incident recorded were included in the main analysis. Compared with other non-exposed periods, a higher risk of poisoning was found in the 30 days before the first prescription (IRR 2.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.33-5.22) and exposure periods within 30 days of the first prescription (IRR 2.18, 95% CI 1.06-4.48), but not during prolonged exposure. However, compared with 30 days before the first prescription as well as exposure periods within 30 days of the first prescription, there was a lower risk during the subsequent exposure (IRRs 0.49 and 0.60, respectively). Similar results to the main analysis were also found in the subgroup analysis of intentional poisoning and females, but not in that of accidental poisoning and males. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of all-cause poisoning was higher shortly before and after the first MPH prescription and became lower during the subsequent prescription period. Our results do not support an association between the use of MPH and an increased risk of all-cause poisoning in children and adolescents and, in fact, suggest that longer-term use of MPH may be associated with a lower risk of all-cause poisoning, although this latter finding requires further study.

Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants and risk of fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: Comparative fracture risk for non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) remains unclear. This study aimed to provide summary relative risk (RR) estimates for associations between NOACs vs. VKAs and fracture risk. METHODS AND RESULTS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched from 2010 to 26 May 2020. Observational studies investigating the association between NOACs vs. VKAs and fracture risk in patients with AF were included. The adjusted effect estimates were pooled using the DerSimonian-Laird random effects models. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) and the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiological (MOOSE) guidelines were followed. Five observational studies comprising 269 922 patients and 4289 fractures were included. Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants use was associated with a lower risk of any fractures compared to VKAs use, with moderate heterogeneity [pooled RR = 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.75-0.92, P < 0.001, I2 = 73.0%]. When comparing individual NOAC to VKAs, a statistically significant lower risk of any fractures was found for rivaroxaban (pooled RR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.71-0.88, P < 0.001, I2 = 55.2%) and apixaban (pooled RR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.60-0.92, P = 0.007, I2 = 54.5%), but not dabigatran (pooled RR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.74-1.01, P = 0.061, I2 = 74.6%). No differences were observed in all head-to-head comparisons between NOACs. CONCLUSION: This large meta-analysis suggests that NOACs use was associated with a lower risk of fractures compared with VKAs. Fracture risks were similar between NOACs. These findings may help inform the optimal anticoagulant choice for patients with AF at high risk of fracture.