Strategies for staying smoke-free after rehab

Flinders University

LinkedIn
MessageWhatsAppEmail

 

image: 

Professor Billie Bonevski, FHMRI, Flinders University

view more 

Credit: Flinders University

For people recovering from substance use disorders, quitting smoking remains one of the most difficult—but most crucial—steps toward long-term health.

New research from Flinders University reveals that providing consistent support and access to a range of nicotine replacement therapies (NRTs) can help people in recovery take that vital step.

A first-of-its-kind trial to compare vapes with combination nicotine replacement therapy (cNRT) - patches, gum, and lozenges - in people leaving smoke-free drug and alcohol rehab facilities was published today in the prestigious journal, The Lancet Public Health.

“Quitting smoking is never easy—but for people emerging from detox, it can be even harder,” says lead author Professor Billie Bonevski, Dean (Research) and Director of Flinders Health and Medical Institute (FHMRI).

“People recovering from substance use are more than twice as likely to smoke as the general population—and far more likely to suffer and die from tobacco-related illness.

“Yet, despite the overwhelming health burden, effective quit strategies tailored for those navigating addiction recovery have been in too short a supply.”

Tobacco smoking among people with substance use disorder (SUD) is a leading cause of health burden, with the prevalence of smoking more than double (84%) that of people without SUD (31%).

People with SUD also tend to experience complex comorbidities, including respiratory ill-health associated with smoking, and mental health challenges.

The study tracked more than 360 adults leaving detox facilities who were randomly given either a 12-week supply of vapes or a combination of nicotine gum, lozenge, inhalator and mouth spray. Both groups were also given Quitline behavioural smoking-cessation counselling.

At the nine-month follow-up, around 10% of people in both groups reported abstaining from smoking – a notable achievement in a cohort where long-term quit rates are typically near zero.

“Our findings underscore the importance of offering comprehensive support to people in drug and alcohol services who want to quit smoking,” says Professor Bonevski.

“This isn’t about one therapy outperforming another—it’s about building a system that gives people the best chance to succeed.

“What matters most is ensuring that people in recovery have access to a range of proven tools, because all nicotine replacement options appear to help.

“That means integrating smoking cessation into addiction treatment, providing tailored support, and ensuring that all effective nicotine therapies are readily available.”

The research contributes to a growing body of evidence that quitting smoking should be a key component of addiction recovery and that with the right support, it is possible.

“We need to treat tobacco dependence with the same urgency and support we give to other substances,” she says.

“Helping people in recovery quit smoking can save lives—and now we know there’s more than one way to do it.”

The paper, ‘Nicotine e-cigarettes for smoking cessation following discharge from smokefree inpatient alcohol and other drug withdrawal services: A pragmatic randomized controlled trial’, by Billie Bonevski, Jane Rich, Dan I Lubman, Catherine Segan, Amanda Baker, Ron Borland, Chris Oldmeadow, Coral Gartner, Natalie Walker, Adrian Dunlop, Mark Daglish, Christopher Bullen, Linda Bauld, David Jacka, Joshua B B Garfield, Rose McCrohan, Ashleigh Guillaumier and Victoria Manning was published in The Lancet Public Health journal.

Post embargo link: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpub/article/PIIS2468-2667(25)00101-X/fulltext 

Acknowledgments: Authors thank the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia for funding the trial with a Project Grant (GNT1160245). Authors also thank trial participants, the many study-related staff at the withdrawal service trial sites and coordinating trial centre, and the Quitline Victoria staff who contributed to the conduct of this trial.

---

Journal

The Lancet Public Health

Method of Research

Randomized controlled/clinical trial

Subject of Research

People

Article Title

Nicotine e-cigarettes for smoking cessation following discharge from smoke-free inpatient alcohol and other drug withdrawal services: a pragmatic two-arm, single-blinded, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial

Article Publication Date

30-Jun-2025

COI Statement

CB declares grants for research from the New Zealand Ministry of Health, Health New Zealand, Health Research Council, Wake Forest University, and Education New Zealand, and support for travel to scientific meetings from Kenvue Asia, University of Edinburgh, and the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, for which he has served as President and Board member. All other authors declare no competing

 

IVF and IUI pregnancy rates remain stable across Europe, despite an increasing uptake of single embryo transfer

Fewer in vitro fertilisation (IVF) and intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles were reported in Europe in 20202, but clinical pregnancy rates remained stable, according to new data

European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology

LinkedInWeChatBlueskyMessageWhatsAppEmail

(Paris, France, Tuesday, 1 July 2025) Fewer in vitro fertilisation (IVF) and intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles were reported in Europe in 20202, but clinical pregnancy rates remained stable, according to data presented at the 41st Annual Meeting of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) [1].  

Preliminary data from the ESHRE European IVF Monitoring (EIM) Consortium [2] reveals a steady and progressive rise in the use of Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART). In 2022, a total of 960,347 ART treatment cycles were reported by 1,371 clinics across 39 European countries, a 15.6% reduction from the 1,137,177 cycles reported in 2021 [3].

Of these 2022 treatment cycles, 137,148 were IVF, 317,415 intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), 365,905 frozen embryo transfers (FET), 92,677 preimplantation genetic testing (PGT), and 41,138 oocyte donation (OD) cycles. In addition, data reported 126,185 IUI treatments using partner semen and 42,532 using donor semen. A total of 30,758* fertility preservation interventions, including oocyte, ovarian tissue, semen, and testicular tissue banking, were reported from 14 countries.

Clinical pregnancy rates [4] remained broadly stable between 2021 and 2022. For IVF, the rate per aspiration/thawing was 26.3% in 2021 and 25.8% in 2022, while the rate per transfer was 33.5% and 32.7%, respectively. For ICSI, pregnancy rates per aspiration were 23.9% in 2021 versus 24.0% in 2022, and per transfer were 33.5% versus 32.5%. Pregnancy rates using FET were 37.0% in 2021, compared to 36.6% in 2022.

The use of single embryo transfer continued to increase, rising from 60.5% in 2021 to 62.6% in 2022. Correspondingly, singleton delivery rates improved from 90.4% to 91.5%, while twin deliveries declined from 9.5% to 8.4%. Triplet deliveries remained stable at 0.1%.

Chair of the EIM Consortium, Professor Dr. Diane De Neubourg, stated: “The report confirms the continued high utilisation of ART and IUI across Europe, with over 960,000 treatment cycles reported in 2022 alone. While total reported cycles decreased slightly compared to 2021, clinical pregnancy rates remained stable, and singleton birth rates continued to rise, reflecting growing adoption of single embryo transfer. As the largest dataset on medically assisted reproduction in Europe, the EIM report remains a vital tool for improving transparency, quality assurance, and long-term vigilance in reproductive medicine.”

Professor Dr. Karen Sermon, Chair of ESHRE, added: “This year’s report highlights the importance of consistent, collaborative data collection across Europe. Despite a slight decline in overall treatment cycles in 2022, the stable pregnancy rates and continued uptake of single embryo transfer reflect steady progress in clinical practice. By strengthening standardised reporting, we continue to drive improvements in care quality and outcomes for patients undergoing medically assisted reproduction.”

Data collection and reporting:

The ESHRE EIM report represents the largest data collection on medically assisted reproduction in Europe. Since 1997, ART data aggregated by national registries, clinics, or professional societies have been collected and analysed by the EIM. This year's data, covering treatments from January 1 to December 31, 2022, were provided by national registries or medical associations from 39 European countries.

The authors note in their presentation that the findings should be interpreted with caution, as the methods of data collection and levels of completeness of reported data vary among European countries. 

 

ENDS

 

Notes to editors:

A reference to the ESHRE Annual Meeting must be included in all coverage and/or articles associated with this study.

For more information or to arrange an expert interview, please contact the ESHRE Press Office at: press@eshre.eu

*The data for this aspect of the report is still under review.

 

About the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology

The main aim of ESHRE is to promote interest in infertility care and to aim for a holistic understanding of reproductive biology and medicine.

ESHRE collaborates world-wide and advocates universal improvements in scientific research, encourages and evaluates new developments in the field, and fosters harmonisation in clinical practice. It also provides guidance to enhance effectiveness, safety and quality assurance in clinical and laboratory procedures, psychosocial care, and promotes ethical practice. ESHRE also fosters prevention of infertility and related educational programmes and promotes reproductive rights regardless of the individual’s background. ESHRE’s activities include teaching, training, professional accreditations, mentoring and career planning for junior professionals, as well as developing and maintaining data registries. It also facilitates and disseminates research in human reproduction and embryology to the general public, scientists, clinicians, allied personnel, and patient associations.

Website: https://www.eshre.eu/

About Human Reproduction

Human Reproduction is a monthly journal of ESHRE and is one of the top three journals in the world in the field of reproductive biology, obstetrics and gynaecology. It is published by Oxford Journals, a division of Oxford University Press.

References :

1. Presentation “Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) in Europe 2022 and development of a strategy of vigilance: Preliminary results generated from European registers by the ESHRE EIM Consortium.” Presented at the ESHRE 41st Annual Meeting, 1 July 2025.
2. This is the 26th ESHRE report based on data collected and analysed by EIM, which is a group of representatives of national registries on assisted reproductive technology (ART). Since its first report in 1997, EIM has recorded almost 14 million treatments, with 2.8 million children born based on information from national registries, clinics, or professional societies. The findings have been reported in manuscripts published in Human Reproduction.
3. Smeenk, J., Wyns, C., De Geyter, Ch., Bergh, C., Cuevas, I., De Neubourg, D., Kupka, M. S., Rezabek, K., Baldani, D., & Tandler-Schneider, A. (2024). Assisted reproductive technology (ART) in Europe 2021 and development of a strategy of vigilance: Preliminary results generated from European registers by the ESHRE EIM Consortium. Human Reproduction, 39(Suppl_1). https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deae108.136.
4. Clinical pregnancy refers to a pregnancy confirmed by an ultrasound scan that shows one or more gestational sacs – the fluid-filled structure surrounding an embryo – or definitive clinical signs of pregnancy.

 

Study projects over 14 million preventable deaths by 2030 if USAID defunding continues

USAID funding helped save 91 million lives over the past 20 years—new research warns that recent U.S. aid cuts could now put that progress at risk

Barcelona Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal)

LinkedInWeChatBlueskyMessageWhatsAppEmail

A new study published in The Lancet has raised urgent concerns about the global health consequences of recent cuts to U.S. foreign aid. The study, coordinated by researchers from the Barcelona Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal), together with the Institute of Collective Health of the Federal University of Bahia (ISC-UFBA), the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), and the Manhiça Centre for Health Research (CISM), among others, estimates that 91 million deaths were prevented between 2001 and 2021 in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) thanks to programs supported by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the largest funding agency for humanitarian and development aid worldwide. However, recent U.S. foreign aid cuts could reverse this progress and lead to more than 14 million additional deaths by 2030, including over 4.5 million children under five.

“These findings come at a critical moment,” said Davide Rasella, ICREA Research Professor at ISGlobal and coordinator of the study. “The 4th International Conference on Financing for Development (FFD4), taking place this week in Seville, Spain, is a key opportunity to realign global financing with the real needs on the ground. If we want to achieve the SDGs, we cannot afford to dismantle funding mechanisms—like USAID—that have already proven to save millions of lives. Now is the time to scale up, not scale back.”

91 million lives saved

The researchers analysed data from 133 countries and combined two approaches: a retrospective evaluation covering the years 2001 to 2021, and forecasting models projecting impacts through 2030. They used statistical models that accounted for factors such as population, income, education, and health systems to estimate the effect of USAID funding on mortality, also looking at differences by age group and cause of death. Finally, they used microsimulation models to estimate how many additional deaths could occur if current funding cuts continue.

The study found that USAID-supported programs were associated with a 15% reduction in all-cause mortality and a 32% reduction in mortality among children under five. The authors estimate that more than 91 million deaths were prevented during this period, of which approximately 30 million were among children. In countries receiving high levels of support, the strongest impact was seen in priority disease areas: mortality from HIV/AIDS was reduced by 74%, malaria by 53%, and neglected tropical diseases by 51%, compared to countries with low or no USAID funding. Significant reductions were also observed in deaths caused by tuberculosis, nutritional deficiencies, diarrheal diseases, lower respiratory infections, and maternal and perinatal conditions.

“Our analysis shows that USAID funding has been an essential force in saving lives and improving health outcomes in some of the world’s most vulnerable regions over the past two decades,” says Daniella Cavalcanti, Postdoctoral Researcher at the Institute of Collective Health and first author of the study.

Millions of lives are now at risk

To estimate the future consequences of recent funding cuts, the researchers used forecasting models simulating the impact of two scenarios: continuing 2023-level funding, or implementing the sharp reductions announced in early 2025—amounting to an 83% cut to USAID programs. Their projections show that if the cuts continue, more than 14 million additional deaths could occur by 2030, including over 4.5 million among children under five, or about 700,000 extra child deaths per year. These figures reflect the projected consequences of halting funding not only for health services but also for critical sectors such as nutrition, education, water and sanitation, and humanitarian relief.

Rasella, emphasizes the scale of the risk: “Our projections indicate that these cuts could lead to a sharp increase in preventable deaths, particularly in the most fragile countries. They risk abruptly halting—and even reversing—two decades of progress in health among vulnerable populations. For many low- and middle-income countries, the resulting shock would be comparable in scale to a global pandemic or a major armed conflict.”

"From our experience on the ground, we have witnessed how USAID support has strengthened local health systems’ ability to respond to diseases like HIV, malaria, and tuberculosis. Cutting this funding now not only puts lives at risk—it also undermines critical infrastructure that has taken decades to build," concludes Francisco Saúte, General Director at the Manhiça Health Research Centre (CISM) and co-author of the study.

A global domino effect

The study warns that the impact of U.S. aid cuts could extend beyond the agency’s own programs. With the United States previously contributing over 40% of global humanitarian funding, other international donors may also reduce their commitments. This could further weaken service delivery in countries already dependent on external support.

“The findings of this study are even more concerning given that other international donors—primarily in the EU—have also announced substantial reductions in their aid budgets, potentially leading to even more additional deaths in the coming years,” adds Caterina Monti, Predoctoral Researcher at ISGlobal and one of the authors of the study.

Beyond the direct USAID support and interventions in healthcare provision, the authors highlight the importance of USAID-funded programs in improving education, food security, clean water access, and economic resilience—key elements that shape the social determinants of health. Reducing this support could undermine long-term development and stability in many LMICs.

"US citizens contribute about 17 cents per day to USAID, around $64 per year. I think most people would support continued USAID funding if they knew just how effective such a small contribution can be to saving millions of lives," says James Macinko, co-author of the study and Professor at UCLA.

The research is the first comprehensive analysis to assess the impact of total USAID funding—including support for health care, nutrition, humanitarian aid, development, education, and related sectors—on mortality rates in LMICs over the past two decades. The authors emphasize that the projections represent the most probable scenario based on currently available data and policy decisions, but that future outcomes could vary depending on how governments and institutions respond.

---

Journal

The Lancet

DOI

10.1016/S0140-6736(25)01186-9 

Method of Research

Data/statistical analysis

Subject of Research

People

Article Title

Evaluating the Comprehensive Impact of Two Decades of USAID Interventions and Forecasting the Effects of Defunding on Mortality up to 2030.

Article Publication Date

30-Jun-2025

 

The most effective diabetes drugs don't reach enough US patients yet

University of California - San Francisco

A UCSF analysis has found that the newer generation of much more effective diabetes medications are reaching only a fraction of the patients who are recommended to take them based on new guidelines.  

Type 2 diabetes (T2D), a condition in which the body can’t use insulin to clear sugar from the bloodstream, affects 1 in 10 Americans. It comes with grave health risks, including cardiovascular and kidney disease.  

The study assessed medications that patients received within a year of T2D diagnosis. During the period under review — 2014 to 2022 — groups like the American Diabetes Association and the American Heart Association began encouraging the use of newer medications over some older, less effective ones.  

The analysis, which is based on more than 40,000 records from the University of California Health Data Warehouse, found some encouraging results. 

The use of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors or glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists — two newer categories of drugs — increased, particularly among patients with cardiovascular or kidney disease.  

Meanwhile, the use of sulfonylureas — a category of diabetes drug with severe side effects, now seen as a last resort in treatment — declined. And the use of metformin and insulins, the classic medications for diabetes, declined slightly. 

Still, by 2022, just 20% T2D patients were receiving GLP-1 drugs within a year of diagnosis, and less than 15% of patients were receiving SGLT2 drugs — reflecting a gap between what the professional guidelines recommend and the care that patients are receiving.  

The researchers gave several reasons for why this might be. One is that GLP-1 drugs, like Wegovy and Ozempic, are expensive, and insurance doesn’t always cover them. Another is that not every provider knows that leading organizations recommend prescribing GLP-1 and SGLT2 drugs, like Jardiance or Farxiga, for T2D from the moment of diagnosis. 

“Some of the most devastating consequences of diabetes come from its effects on the heart and kidney, and thankfully, we now have drugs that target those effects head on,” said Jonathan Watanabe, PharmD, MS, PhD, the senior author of the study. “But to maximize the benefit for the many hundreds of thousands of patients in the U.S., we need to increase access to these drugs and make sure that clinicians understand just how beneficial they are.” 

Publication: Journal of Diabetes 
Other Researchers: William Hou of UC Irvine; Katherine R. Tuttle, MD, of University of Washington; Weining Shen, PhD, of UC Irvine, and Andrew Rekes, MD, of UC Irvine.  

 

About UCSF: The University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) is exclusively focused on the health sciences and is dedicated to promoting health worldwide through advanced biomedical research, graduate-level education in the life sciences and health professions, and excellence in patient care. UCSF Health, which serves as UCSF's primary academic medical center, includes top-ranked specialty hospitals and other clinical programs, and has affiliations throughout the Bay Area. UCSF School of Medicine also has a regional campus in Fresno. Learn more at ucsf.edu, or see our Fact Sheet.

###

 

Follow UCSF
ucsf.edu | Facebook.com/ucsf | YouTube.com/ucsf

---

Journal

Journal of Diabetes

 

Rare achievement: UTA undergrad publishes research

Caroline King’s research on rural midwifery was published in a peer-reviewed nursing journal

University of Texas at Arlington

Facebook

XLinkedInWeChat
WhatsAppEmail

 

image: 

UTA nursing student Caroline King had a research article on midwifery recently published

view more 

Credit: Herschel Heath, UT Arlington

Caroline King didn’t expect to get involved in research when she arrived at The University of Texas at Arlington. But after joining the Honors College and taking a job with the Center for Rural Health and Nursing, she found herself diving into a literature review on midwifery in rural Texas.

Two and a half years later, King is a published author in the Online Journal of Rural Nursing and Health Care. While publication is a milestone for any academic, it’s a rare achievement for an undergraduate.

“It’s an honor. It’s a wonderful feeling,” said King, who participated in The University of Texas System’s prestigious Archer Fellowship Program and is on track to graduate in December 2025. “Honestly, sometimes I still can’t believe it. I think, ‘Oh, wow, I actually did that.’”

Her article explored the benefits of midwifery for women with low-risk pregnancies. Studies show that midwife-assisted births can lead to earlier initiation of breastfeeding and offer a more economical alternative to traditional hospital deliveries.

“There’s a lot of different factors but, boiling it down, having a midwife-led birth is safe and cost-effective,” King said. “It could be a viable health care option that more people in the U.S. should consider if their pregnancy is low risk.”

Aspen Drude, manager of UTA’s Center for Rural Health and Nursing, hired King after recognizing her drive and passion.

“I’m incredibly proud to see Caroline’s dedication and hard work recognized through publication—what an exciting milestone,” Drude said. “This is just the beginning for Caroline. I can’t wait to see what she tackles next.”

For her research, King analyzed 15 articles published between 2017 and 2022 that presented data on births in the United States. The process was long and time-intensive—something that few outside of academia can fully comprehend.

“Whenever I explain it to my family, especially my grandparents, they’ll be like, ‘You’re still doing that research?’” King said. “I’m like, ‘Yes, it takes a while to do research.’ Just explaining the time commitment of researching databases and reading articles and ensuring the validity and the rigor of different types of experiments—it’s a lot.”

About The University of Texas at Arlington (UTA)

Celebrating its 130th anniversary in 2025, The University of Texas at Arlington is a growing public research university in the heart of the thriving Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex. With a student body of over 41,000, UTA is the second-largest institution in the University of Texas System, offering more than 180 undergraduate and graduate degree programs. Recognized as a Carnegie R-1 university, UTA stands among the nation’s top 5% of institutions for research activity. UTA and its 280,000 alumni generate an annual economic impact of $28.8 billion for the state. The University has received the Innovation and Economic Prosperity designation from the Association of Public and Land Grant Universities and has earned recognition for its focus on student access and success, considered key drivers to economic growth and social progress for North Texas and beyond.

UTA nursing student Caroline King had a research article on midwifery recently published

Credit

Herschel Heath, UT Arlington

Usage Restrictions

---

DOI

10.14574/vk5zhs55 

Method of Research

Literature review

Subject of Research

People

Article Title

Rural Texan Mothers Need Midwives: A Literature Review of Midwife-led Care and Inequities of Women’s Healthcare at the State-level.

 

Fact or fiction? The ADHD info dilemma

Syracuse University

Facebook

XLinkedInWeChatBlueskyMessageWhatsAppEmail

 

image: 

For the study, Ashley Schiros, a Ph.D. candidate in clinical psychology at Syracuse University, created TikTok videos containing both accurate and inaccurate information about ADHD to investigate how such content influenced students’ perceptions of the disorder and their confidence in understanding it.

view more 

Credit: Syracuse University

TikTok is one of the fastest-growing and most popular social media platforms in the world – especially among college-age individuals. In the United States alone, there are over 136 million TikTok users aged 18 and older, with approximately 45 million falling within the college-age demographic. And college students aren’t just using the platform to watch viral videos. They’re also turning to it as a source of information, with around 40% of Americans using TikTok as a search engine.

While the app can be a valuable source of tips and how-to content, users should remain cautious and discerning, especially when it comes to health and safety information related to conditions like attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), subjects about which misinformation can easily spread. To explore the impact of such factually incorrect content, researchers from the Department of Psychology at Syracuse University’s College of Arts and Sciences conducted a study examining how college-aged students respond to inaccurate ADHD-related content.

Their findings, published in the high-impact journal European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, revealed that exposure to ADHD misinformation on TikTok significantly reduced students’ accurate understanding of the disorder. The study’s lead author, Ashley Schiros, a Ph.D. candidate in clinical psychology at Syracuse University, notes that this is concerning because such narratives could reshape public perceptions of ADHD in ways that do not align with established scientific knowledge.

“The dangers of ADHD misinformation spread via social media is that individuals may develop an inaccurate understanding of the signs, symptoms and treatments for ADHD,” notes Schiros, who co-authored the study with Kevin Antshel, professor of psychology at Syracuse University. “On one hand, misconceptions about ADHD may lead to individuals having less accurate knowledge about ADHD and may contribute to unwarranted treatment-seeking. On the other hand, belief that non-evidence-based treatments are an effective means of managing ADHD may lead to self-diagnosis or create barriers to evidence-based treatment-seeking.”

A TikTok Test

Schiros became interested in conducting the study after noticing a trend in clinical settings: many college students were seeking psychological assessments or therapy under the impression that they had ADHD—an impression often shaped by misinformation encountered online. The study aimed to explore how digital content about ADHD was influencing students’ interest in obtaining a diagnosis or pursuing treatment.

She and her co-authors developed an assessment in which approximately 500 Syracuse University students were randomly assigned to view TikTok posts featuring either accurate information about ADHD or factually incorrect content. The accurate content included slides with factual statements about ADHD symptoms, such as: 'often have trouble completing assignments on time,' 'difficulty remaining focused during lectures,' and 'frequently losing important items like your phone, keys, or water bottle.' In contrast, the misinformation slides presented inaccurate claims about ADHD symptoms, including: 'the urge to people please,' 'ADHD paralysis,' and 'a chronic feeling of being overwhelmed over the smallest tasks.'

A baseline measure of ADHD knowledge was completed pre-content-viewing. Following content-viewing, participants completed measures assessing ADHD-related knowledge, stigma and treatment-seeking intentions.

Deciphering Real from Reel

Researchers found that participants exposed to ADHD misinformation demonstrated significantly lower accuracy in their ADHD knowledge, yet reported greater confidence in that knowledge after viewing the content. Notably, the misinformation group also expressed stronger intentions to seek both evidence-based and non-evidence-based treatments. Additionally, participants’ perception of the content as entertaining was significantly linked to both their ADHD knowledge and treatment-seeking intentions. Schiros notes that their findings suggest that the sharing of inaccurate TikTok content not only undermines factual understanding of ADHD but also fosters misplaced confidence and increased motivation to pursue treatment. And the implications of this work stretch beyond ADHD diagnoses.

“Although this study focused specifically on misinformation regarding ADHD online, there is a wide range of factually incorrect advice regarding various health and mental health topics on social media,” she says. “Consumers of online content are strongly encouraged to be aware of the prevalence of misinformation and learn tools to critically engage with and cross-verify the information they encounter online.”

Fact-Checking the Feed

So how can these changes be achieved? According to Schiros, addressing ADHD misinformation on social media is a complex challenge that likely requires systems-level interventions. She suggests that large institutions, such as medical centers and universities, can play a key role by launching social media campaigns that both pre-bunk and debunk common ADHD myths, while also sharing accurate and engaging content.

Additionally, Schiros highlights the potential for creator-focused interventions. Providing content creators with tools to improve the accuracy of their health-related posts and offering incentives for sharing evidence-based information could further help curb the spread of misinformation.

The team intends to conduct a follow-up study examining real-world exposure to ADHD misinformation by analyzing participants’ typical TikTok usage and its relationship to their knowledge of ADHD and intentions to seek treatment. The authors say future research is also needed to explore how online ADHD content influences stigma and to evaluate effective strategies for countering inaccurate information.

---

Journal

European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry