Evidence Review: Prescribed Stimulant Treatment for ADHD and Long-Term Risk of Substance Use Disorders

Reviewed by Dr. Margarita Krasnova, MD · Last reviewed 2026-06-21

Scoping Review of Available Evidence: Prescribed Stimulant Treatment for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Long-Term Risk of Substance Use Disorders

This document is presented as a Scoping Review of Available Evidence rather than a fully PRISMA-compliant systematic review. The reviewer assessed the alignment of the retrieved evidence with the prespecified PICO and identified the following limitations: the included studies showed only partial overlap with the target population's prespecified PICO characteristics. A human reviewer should evaluate whether the inclusion criteria, search strategy, or PICO formulation require revision before final submission.

Authors

Margarita Krasnova, MD

Abstract

Background: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder is frequently treated with stimulant medications, yet concern persists that therapeutic stimulant exposure may itself predispose individuals to later substance use disorders. Clarifying this relationship is essential for informed prescribing decisions and for counseling patients and families.

Objective: This scoping review mapped the available evidence on whether prescribed stimulant treatment for ADHD is associated with increased, decreased, or unchanged long-term risk of subsequent substance use disorders compared with no pharmacologic treatment, non-stimulant treatment, or healthy controls.

Methods: A systematic search of electronic databases identified studies addressing the prespecified population, intervention, comparator, and outcome elements. A single reviewer screened records, assessed eligibility, and extracted data. Twenty-three articles met inclusion criteria, encompassing longitudinal cohorts, cross-sectional analyses, systematic and scoping reviews, narrative reviews, case reports, and small observational studies. Given the heterogeneity of designs and outcomes, findings were synthesized narratively rather than pooled quantitatively.

Results: The largest retrospective cohort reported a protective association between stimulant treatment and subsequent substance use disorders, while several other cohort studies found non-significant overall associations, with only select substance-specific outcomes reaching statistical significance. Studies examining timing of treatment initiation yielded mixed findings: early-onset, longer-duration treatment was generally not associated with elevated misuse risk, whereas late-onset, short-duration use was linked to higher odds of prescription stimulant misuse. Prior systematic reviews were themselves split, with some concluding that stimulant treatment may reduce risk and others characterizing the evidence as inconclusive. Narrative reviews and small observational studies leaned in a protective direction but lacked the controlled designs to support firm inferences. Heterogeneity across substance-specific outcomes, study designs, and comparator definitions was a consistent feature of the evidence base.

Conclusions: Available evidence suggests that prescribed stimulant treatment for ADHD does not show evidence of increased risk of subsequent substance use disorders and may be consistent with a modest protective effect, though substantial heterogeneity across study designs, populations, and substance-specific outcomes precludes definitive conclusions.

Keywords

Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Central Nervous System Stimulants, Substance-Related Disorders, Methylphenidate, Amphetamine

1. Introduction

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder is among the most prevalent neurodevelopmental conditions, affecting an estimated five to seven percent of children and persisting into adulthood in a substantial proportion of cases. The disorder is characterized by developmentally inappropriate levels of inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity that impair academic, occupational, and social functioning. Beyond these core deficits, ADHD carries a well-documented elevation in risk for substance use disorders across the lifespan. Individuals with ADHD initiate substance use earlier, progress to problematic use more rapidly, and experience higher rates of nicotine dependence, alcohol use disorder, cannabis use disorder, and illicit drug use than the general population. This vulnerability varies by age at diagnosis, sex, psychiatric comorbidity burden, and ADHD severity, making the intersection of ADHD and substance use a pressing clinical and public-health concern.

Prescribed stimulant medications --- methylphenidate, mixed amphetamine salts, lisdexamfetamine, dextroamphetamine, and related preparations --- remain the first-line pharmacologic treatment for ADHD across age groups. Their short-term efficacy in reducing core symptoms is firmly established. What remains contested is whether long-term stimulant exposure alters the trajectory toward substance use disorders. Two competing hypotheses have shaped clinical debate: one holds that effective symptom control reduces impulsivity-driven experimentation and thereby lowers subsequent substance use risk; the other warns that early exposure to dopaminergic agents may sensitize reward pathways or normalize stimulant consumption, raising risk. Published longitudinal studies, meta-analyses, and registry-based analyses have reached divergent conclusions, and the direction and magnitude of any association may depend on treatment duration, age at initiation, comparator selection, and outcome definition. A contemporary synthesis that accounts for these sources of heterogeneity is therefore warranted.

This review aims to evaluate whether prescribed stimulant treatment for ADHD is associated with increased, decreased, or unchanged long-term risk of subsequent substance use disorders --- including nicotine dependence, alcohol use disorder, cannabis use disorder, illicit drug use, polysubstance abuse, stimulant misuse and diversion, and shifts in age of substance-use initiation --- compared with no pharmacologic treatment, non-stimulant medication, or delayed treatment in children, adolescents, and adults diagnosed with ADHD.

2. Methods

2.1 Search Strategy

A systematic search of PubMed, OpenAlex, ClinicalTrials.gov, Author's reference collection was conducted using a structured Boolean query assembled from Population, Intervention/Exposure, and Outcome keyword sets derived from the study's PICO framework. The population of interest was: Children, adolescents, and adults diagnosed with ADHD according to standardized diagnostic criteria, including subgroups defined by age at treatment initiation, sex, psychiatric comorbidity, and ADHD severity. The intervention/exposure of interest was: Prescribed therapeutic stimulant medications for ADHD, including methylphenidate, dexmethylphenidate, mixed amphetamine salts, lisdexamfetamine, dextroamphetamine, and other approved stimulant preparations. The primary outcome was: Substance use disorders, nicotine dependence, alcohol use disorder, cannabis use disorder, illicit drug use, polysubstance abuse, stimulant misuse and diversion, age of substance-use initiation, and long-term functional outcomes. The search was conducted on 2026-06-21. Records were deduplicated before screening (see §2.3 for counts).

In addition to the database searches described above, 67 articles were identified from the reviewer's personal reference library, matched by PubMed ID, DOI, and PubMed Central ID. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT identifiers were not included in the library match. Personal reference library articles requiring reviewer verification are listed in Appendix B.

Boolean Query (verbatim)

PubMed

((("Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity"[MeSH Terms] OR "adolescents with ADHD"[Title/Abstract] OR "children with ADHD"[Title/Abstract] OR "ADHD diagnosis"[Title/Abstract] OR "ADHD severity"[Title/Abstract] OR "adults with ADHD"[Title/Abstract] OR "pediatric ADHD"[Title/Abstract] OR "childhood ADHD"[Title/Abstract] OR "ADHD subtypes"[Title/Abstract] OR "adult ADHD"[Title/Abstract] OR "ADHD combined type"[Title/Abstract] OR "ADHD inattentive type"[Title/Abstract] OR "comorbid ADHD"[Title/Abstract] OR "attention deficit hyperactivity disorder"[Title/Abstract] OR "DSM ADHD"[Title/Abstract] OR "hyperactivity disorder"[Title/Abstract]) AND ("Adolescent"[MeSH Terms] OR "Adult"[MeSH Terms] OR "Child"[MeSH Terms] OR "adolescents"[Title/Abstract] OR "adolescent"[Title/Abstract] OR "pediatric"[Title/Abstract] OR "teen"[Title/Abstract] OR "adults"[Title/Abstract] OR "youth"[Title/Abstract])) AND ("ADHD medication"[Title/Abstract] OR "ADHD pharmacotherapy"[Title/Abstract] OR "ADHD treatment"[Title/Abstract] OR "stimulant medication"[Title/Abstract] OR "prescribed stimulant"[Title/Abstract] OR "stimulant drugs"[Title/Abstract] OR "mixed amphetamine salts"[Title/Abstract] OR "stimulant prescription"[Title/Abstract] OR "stimulant treatment"[Title/Abstract] OR "Dextroamphetamine"[MeSH Terms] OR "dextroamphetamine"[Title/Abstract] OR "Dexamphetamine"[Title/Abstract] OR "stimulant therapy"[Title/Abstract] OR "Ritalin"[Title/Abstract] OR "Amphetamines"[MeSH Terms] OR "amphetamines"[Title/Abstract] OR "Amphetamine"[MeSH Terms] OR "amphetamine"[Title/Abstract] OR "lisdexamphetamine"[Title/Abstract] OR "stimulant pharmacotherapy"[Title/Abstract] OR "Adderall"[Title/Abstract] OR "stimulant"[Title/Abstract]) AND ("Marijuana Abuse"[MeSH Terms] OR "Substance-Related Disorders"[MeSH Terms] OR "Tobacco Use Disorder"[MeSH Terms] OR "Cocaine-Related Disorders"[MeSH Terms] OR "Behavior, Addictive"[MeSH Terms] OR "Alcohol-Related Disorders"[MeSH Terms] OR "substance use disorders"[Title/Abstract] OR "Drug Use Disorders"[Title/Abstract] OR "substance use disorder"[Title/Abstract] OR "drug use disorder"[Title/Abstract] OR "cannabis use disorder"[Title/Abstract] OR "risk of substance use"[Title/Abstract] OR "recreational drug use"[Title/Abstract] OR "Cannabis Dependence"[Title/Abstract] OR "substance abuse"[Title/Abstract] OR "drug dependence"[Title/Abstract] OR "marijuana abuse"[Title/Abstract] OR "onset of substance use"[Title/Abstract] OR "illicit drug use"[Title/Abstract] OR "drug abuse"[Title/Abstract] OR "substance dependence"[Title/Abstract] OR "marijuana use"[Title/Abstract] OR "illegal drug use"[Title/Abstract] OR "tobacco dependence"[Title/Abstract] OR "tobacco use disorder"[Title/Abstract])) AND 2022:2026[dp]

OpenAlex

(("Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity" OR "Attention Deficit and Disruptive Behavior Disorders" OR "adolescents with ADHD" OR "children with ADHD" OR "ADHD diagnosis" OR "ADHD severity" OR "adults with ADHD" OR "pediatric ADHD" OR "childhood ADHD" OR "ADHD subtypes" OR "adult ADHD" OR "ADHD combined type" OR "ADHD inattentive type" OR "comorbid ADHD" OR "attention deficit hyperactivity disorder" OR "DSM ADHD" OR "hyperactivity disorder" OR "attention deficit disorder" OR "attention deficit" OR "hyperkinetic disorder" OR "psychiatric comorbidity") AND (Adolescent OR Adult OR Child OR adolescents)) AND (Dextroamphetamine OR Amphetamines OR Amphetamine OR "Central Nervous System Stimulants" OR Methylphenidate OR "Dexmethylphenidate Hydrochloride" OR "Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate" OR "ADHD medication" OR "ADHD pharmacotherapy" OR "ADHD treatment" OR "stimulant medication" OR "prescribed stimulant" OR "stimulant drugs" OR "mixed amphetamine salts" OR "stimulant prescription" OR "stimulant treatment" OR dextroamphetamine OR Dexamphetamine OR "stimulant therapy" OR Ritalin OR amphetamines OR amphetamine OR lisdexamphetamine OR "stimulant pharmacotherapy" OR Adderall) AND ("Marijuana Abuse" OR "Substance-Related Disorders" OR "Tobacco Use Disorder" OR "Cocaine-Related Disorders" OR "Behavior, Addictive" OR "Alcohol-Related Disorders" OR "Amphetamine-Related Disorders" OR Nicotine OR "Opioid-Related Disorders" OR Alcoholism OR "substance use disorders" OR "Drug Use Disorders" OR "substance use disorder" OR "drug use disorder" OR "cannabis use disorder" OR "risk of substance use" OR "recreational drug use" OR "Cannabis Dependence" OR "substance abuse" OR "drug dependence" OR "marijuana abuse" OR "onset of substance use" OR "illicit drug use" OR "drug abuse" OR "substance dependence")

ClinicalTrials.gov

(("Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity" OR "Attention Deficit and Disruptive Behavior Disorders" OR "adolescents with ADHD" OR "children with ADHD" OR "ADHD diagnosis" OR "ADHD severity" OR "adults with ADHD" OR "pediatric ADHD" OR "childhood ADHD" OR "ADHD subtypes" OR "adult ADHD" OR "ADHD combined type" OR "ADHD inattentive type" OR "comorbid ADHD" OR "attention deficit hyperactivity disorder" OR "DSM ADHD" OR "hyperactivity disorder" OR "attention deficit disorder" OR "attention deficit" OR "hyperkinetic disorder" OR "psychiatric comorbidity") AND (Adolescent OR Adult OR Child OR adolescents)) AND (Dextroamphetamine OR Amphetamines OR Amphetamine OR "Central Nervous System Stimulants" OR Methylphenidate OR "Dexmethylphenidate Hydrochloride" OR "Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate" OR "ADHD medication" OR "ADHD pharmacotherapy" OR "ADHD treatment" OR "stimulant medication" OR "prescribed stimulant" OR "stimulant drugs" OR "mixed amphetamine salts" OR "stimulant prescription" OR "stimulant treatment" OR dextroamphetamine OR Dexamphetamine OR "stimulant therapy" OR Ritalin OR amphetamines OR amphetamine OR lisdexamphetamine OR "stimulant pharmacotherapy" OR Adderall) AND ("Marijuana Abuse" OR "Substance-Related Disorders" OR "Tobacco Use Disorder" OR "Cocaine-Related Disorders" OR "Behavior, Addictive" OR "Alcohol-Related Disorders" OR "Amphetamine-Related Disorders" OR Nicotine OR "Opioid-Related Disorders" OR Alcoholism OR "substance use disorders" OR "Drug Use Disorders" OR "substance use disorder" OR "drug use disorder" OR "cannabis use disorder" OR "risk of substance use" OR "recreational drug use" OR "Cannabis Dependence" OR "substance abuse" OR "drug dependence" OR "marijuana abuse" OR "onset of substance use" OR "illicit drug use" OR "drug abuse" OR "substance dependence")

The Boolean query is assembled as (Population) AND (Intervention/Exposure) only. Comparator and Outcome terms are not AND-joined into the search query, in line with the Cochrane Handbook §4.4.4: outcome and comparator filters belong in inclusion criteria and post-retrieval relevance assessment, not in the search query. This convention prevents premature exclusion of articles that report the outcome or comparator using vocabulary not in the keyword list.

Retrieved records were screened for relevance against the study goal and the prespecified PICO before full-text review and synthesis.

2.1.1 Scope Note (Scoping Review Framing)

This document is presented as a scoping review of available evidence, framed in accordance with the Arksey and O'Malley (2005) scoping review framework and the JBI scoping review methodology. The reviewer assessed the alignment of the retrieved evidence with the prespecified PICO at the end of the retrieval stage and identified the following limitations:

• the included studies showed only partial overlap with the target population's prespecified PICO characteristics

The methodological implication of scoping-review framing is that broader inclusion criteria are accepted: heterogeneous study designs, a wider range of population overlap, and variation in intervention delivery are all tolerated rather than excluded. Pooled effect estimates are not pursued; the synthesis approach is charting and narrative mapping of the available evidence.

2.2 Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

Population: Children, adolescents, and adults diagnosed with ADHD according to standardized diagnostic criteria, including subgroups defined by age at treatment initiation, sex, psychiatric comorbidity, and ADHD severity

Intervention/Exposure: Prescribed therapeutic stimulant medications for ADHD, including methylphenidate, dexmethylphenidate, mixed amphetamine salts, lisdexamfetamine, dextroamphetamine, and other approved stimulant preparations

Comparator: Individuals with ADHD who receive no pharmacologic treatment; individuals with ADHD treated with non-stimulant medications; delayed treatment groups; healthy control populations without ADHD

Outcome: Substance use disorders, nicotine dependence, alcohol use disorder, cannabis use disorder, illicit drug use, polysubstance abuse, stimulant misuse and diversion, age of substance-use initiation, and long-term functional outcomes

Articles were included if they met the prespecified PICO criteria and open-access full text was available for synthesis. Full-text availability was assessed against PubMed Central and additional open-access repositories.

Eligibility Constraints

• Search executed 2026-06-21; publication-year filter: no publication-year filter.
• No language filter applied at retrieval; all results returned by the database query were considered for screening.
• Study design: no design filter was applied at retrieval; study designs were classified post-retrieval (see §2.3 Study Selection).

2.3 Study Selection

329 records were identified across the searched databases (PubMed: 104, OpenAlex: 147, ClinicalTrials.gov: 11, Author's reference collection: 67). After deduplication, 220 records remained (from 329 records prior to deduplication). Following title and abstract screening, 196 records were assessed for relevance. After relevance assessment, 196 articles met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 23 had retrievable full text and were included in the narrative synthesis.

2.4 Data Extraction

Data were extracted from each of the 23 included articles by a single reviewer using a structured extraction template. For every article the reviewer recorded the main finding, the reported direction of effect with respect to the relationship between prescribed stimulant treatment for ADHD and subsequent substance-use outcomes, study design, population characteristics, follow-up duration, sample size, effect-magnitude language as stated by the original authors, and author-stated limitations. Effect-magnitude language was transcribed using the hedging and qualifiers present in the source publication so that downstream synthesis would preserve the precision of the original claims. No second reviewer independently verified the extractions; this single-reviewer approach is disclosed as a methodological consideration.

2.5 Risk of Bias Assessment

Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I.

Most empirical studies were judged to have some concerns or high risk of bias, primarily because of confounding by indication, self-reported exposure measures, and incomplete adjustment for ADHD severity.

2.6 Synthesis Methods

This document is presented as a scoping review of available evidence, synthesized following the Arksey and O'Malley (2005) scoping review framework and the JBI scoping review methodology. The synthesis approach is charting and narrative mapping rather than meta-analysis or pooled effect estimation. Studies were charted according to direction of reported effect, study design, and population characteristics; findings are reported descriptively across the structured narrative subsections of Section 3.2. The scoping framework was selected because the reviewer judged the retrieved studies to have insufficient overlap with the prespecified PICO to support a standard systematic review synthesis. Broader inclusion criteria are therefore accepted, accommodating heterogeneous study designs and a wider range of population overlap than a tightly-specified systematic review would require.

PRISMA 2020 Flow Diagram

The flow of records through identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion is summarized below (PRISMA 2020 Item 16a).

Identification

329 records were identified.

• PubMed: 104
• OpenAlex: 147
• ClinicalTrials.gov: 11
• Author's reference collection: 67

Screening

Records removed as duplicates: 109

Records after deduplication: 220

Records screened: 220

Records excluded during screening: 24

Eligibility

Records assessed for eligibility: 196

Records excluded at eligibility: 0

Included

Records excluded (no retrievable full text): 173

Studies included in synthesis: 23

3. Results

3.1 Study Characteristics

---

Study Design Sample Population Intervention Comparator Follow-up Primary Outcome Direction of Effect Estimate Size Effect

---

Vinod Rao, retrospective 7944 Patients aged ≥12 years Stimulant Stimulant NR Telehealth mixed or aOR: 0.85 (95% 2025 cohort with ADHD who initially pharmacotherapy for pharmacotherapy for stimulant inconclusive CI 0.6--1.2, received any stimulant ADHD via telehealth ADHD via in-person prescribing does p=0.35) prescription between visit not alter overall
March 1, 2020, and SUD risk but may
August 25, 2023, from a signal stimulant
nonprofit, academically use disorder risk.
affiliated medical
system in the
Northeastern United
States, excluding those
with a non-nicotine SUD
diagnosis at the time
of initial stimulant
prescription.

Ty S Schepis, cross-sectional 199560 US secondary school History of ADHD Population controls NR Any ADHD mixed or AOR: 3.1 (95% 2023 multi-cohort students (8th, 10th, pharmacotherapy with no ADHD pharmacotherapy inconclusive CI 2.66--3.62) and 12th grade; modal (stimulant-only, pharmacotherapy history associated
ages 14, 16, and 18 non-stimulant-only, history with higher odds of
years; ages 13--19) or both) prescription
from the nationally stimulant misuse
representative and substance use.
Monitoring the Future
survey, 2005--2020, who
provided data on ADHD
pharmacotherapy history
(N = 199,560).

Iliyan Ivanov, narrative review NR The article is a Stimulant treatment No stimulant NR Most youth benefit mixed or NR 2022 narrative review for ADHD treatment or placebo from stimulants; a inconclusive
examining animal and subpopulation may
human experimental have heightened SUD
studies on stimulant vulnerability.
sensitization effects,
longitudinal and
epidemiologic studies
of stimulant treatment
outcomes in ADHD
cohorts, and
neuroimaging studies of
brain reward system
function in individuals
with ADHD.

Kacper systematic review NR Adults diagnosed with Stimulant treatment No stimulant NR Stimulants in ADHD supports the NR Żełabowski, ADHD, with particular for ADHD treatment or treatment do not study goal
2025 emphasis on adult non-stimulant increase SUD risk
patients with a history treatment and may treat SUD.
of Substance Use
Disorder (SUD), as
examined through
included primary
studies in the
literature review.

Dor systematic review 51 Adolescents and Pharmacological Non-pharmacological NR Pharmacological mixed or NR Warschavsky, students diagnosed with treatment (stimulant or no treatment treatment is inconclusive
2026 ADHD, as studied in and non-stimulant central to ADHD
primary studies medications) for ADHD management but
included in this requires monitoring
structured literature for misuse risk.
review

Raman Baweja, retrospective 1239833 Adolescents and young ADHD pharmacotherapy No ADHD medication 1 year for clinical ADHD supports the aHR: 0.7 (95% 2025 cohort adults aged 15--25 (CNS stimulants and outcomes; 5 years pharmacotherapy study goal CI 0.65--0.75) years diagnosed with non-stimulants) for associated with
ADHD (ICD-10-CM F90) survival/mortality reduced morbidity,
from the TriNetX US analyses treatment uptake,
Collaborative Network, and 30% mortality
of whom 288,159 reduction.
(23.24%) had
co-occurring substance
use disorder (ICD-10-CM
F10--F19), from
2007--2024.

Alynna G cross-sectional 224469 224,469 undergraduates University-level ADHD Lower NR Higher mixed or adjusted Summit, 2025 aged 18--25 years medication treatment university-level ADHD university-level inconclusive prevalence (65.2% cisgender prevalence; medication ADHD medication ratio (aPR): female; 58.7% White) individual-level ADHD prevalence; no prevalence 1.07 (95% CI from 395 universities medication treatment individual-level ADHD associated with 1.04--1.09) participating in the medication treatment more prescription
American College Health stimulant misuse
Association--National among students.
College Health
Assessment III
(ACHA-NCHA III) between
Fall 2019 and Fall
2022.

Alyssa R cross-sectional 144 College students aged ADHD diagnosis (with No ADHD diagnosis 4 years (data for College students supports the Cohen's d: 0.67 Francis, 2022 18-25 years (M=21.32, or without stimulant this study collected with ADHD reported study goal (95% CI SD=0.481) in their medication) during participants' significantly 0.329--1.007, fourth year of college fourth year of the higher prescription p=\< .001) at several private and TRAC longitudinal stimulant misuse
public universities in project) than those without.
Northeastern and
Southeastern United
States, including 62
with clinically
diagnosed ADHD and 82
without ADHD.

Vita V McCabe, observational 11905 Nationally Stimulant therapy for Non-stimulant ADHD 6 years No significant supports the NR 2024 prospective representative ADHD during medications and differences in study goal
multi-cohort multi-cohort panels of adolescence population controls nonmedical
study 11,905 US 12th-grade without ADHD stimulant use or
students (modal age 18, pharmacotherapy cocaine use between
baseline years stimulant-treated
2005--2019) from the and controls.
Monitoring the Future
study, followed
prospectively over six
years into young
adulthood (ages
19--24).

Brooke S G cohort 579 579 children aged 7 to Stimulant treatment No stimulant 16 years (from No evidence mixed or NR Molina, 2023 9 years with rigorously for ADHD (current treatment or fewer baseline to a mean stimulant treatment inconclusive
diagnosed DSM-IV and/or prior) years of stimulant age of 25 years) was associated with
combined-type ADHD, treatment increased or
recruited between 1994 decreased substance
and 1996, initially use risk.
treated in a randomized
clinical trial (MTA)
and assessed repeatedly
until a mean age of 25
years; 80% male.

Bahadar S narrative review NR No specific inclusion Stimulant usage in No stimulant NR Stimulant usage in supports the NR Srichawla, and exclusion criteria ADHD treatment ADHD may help study goal
2022 were utilized; the prevent substance
review included use disorder
articles related to development.
ADHD and SUD
encompassing original
research,
meta-analyses, and
mixed systematic and
meta-analyses
identified via
PubMed/MedLine/PubMed
Central.

Cory Byrne, scoping review 32 Adults with ADHD in ADHD treatments Various comparators NR Literature on ADHD mixed or NR 2023 correctional settings including stimulant or no comparator treatments in inconclusive
(jails, prisons, and pharmacotherapy in across included correctional
correctional correctional settings studies settings is diverse
facilities), as but shallow and
described in articles inconsistent.
identified through the
scoping review's
inclusion criteria
requiring adult
populations in
correctional settings
receiving treatment for
ADHD.

C. De Andrés case report 1 A single 43-year-old Extended-release No comparator (single NR Methylphenidate mixed or NR Lobo, 2023 male cocaine user methylphenidate for case) improved adaptation inconclusive
diagnosed with adult ADHD and moderately
ADHD reduced drug
consumption in ADHD
cocaine user.

Sean Esteban cross-sectional 150395 Nationally Early onset (≤9 Late onset (≥10 NR Early-onset, supports the AOR: 2.47 (95% McCabe, 2024 representative samples years) and longer years) and shorter longer-duration study goal CI 1.8--3.38) of US 10th and 12th duration (≥6 years) duration (\<1 year) stimulant therapy
grade students (modal stimulant therapy for stimulant therapy for associated with
ages 16 and 18) from ADHD ADHD; population lower odds of
the Monitoring the controls stimulant misuse
Future study, surveyed and cocaine use.
from 2005 to 2020.

Sean Esteban cohort 11066 United States 12th Stimulant therapy for No stimulant therapy Approximately 5-6 Adolescents' supports the AOR: 0.714 (95% McCabe, 2024 grade students (modal ADHD during for ADHD during years (from ages stimulant therapy study goal CI ages 17-18) from the adolescence adolescence 17/18 to ages 19-24, not significantly 0.516--0.986) Monitoring the Future surveyed biennially) associated with
study, baseline cohort increased later
years 2005-2017 prescription drug
(N=11,066), followed misuse risk.
biennially into young
adulthood (ages 19-24).

CDA-AMC, 2024 systematic review 1 Adults (aged 18 years Stimulants for adult Nonstimulants for NR No studies found mixed or NR (rapid review) and older) with a ADHD adult ADHD comparing inconclusive
diagnosis of ADHD, with stimulants versus
a subgroup of interest nonstimulants for
being people adult ADHD
incarcerated in effectiveness or
correctional facilities safety.
or engaged in criminal
activity

Icro other NR Adults with dual Stimulant treatment No stimulant NR Toxicomanic supports the NR Maremmani, disorder (ADHD and for ADHD in patients treatment or behavior sharply study goal
2022 substance use with cocaine pre-treatment reduced during
disorders) at treatment addiction baseline stimulant treatment
entry into a Dual in ADHD patients
Disorder Unit with cocaine
addiction.

Julie P case report NR Adults diagnosed with Appropriate No stimulant NR Appropriate supports the NR Gentile, 2022 ADHD (narrative review, prescription of treatment stimulant study goal
no specific study stimulants for ADHD prescribing for
population enrolled) ADHD may prevent
illegal substance
use in patients.

Alessandro cross-sectional 103 103 adult outpatients Stimulant-based ADHD Opioid agonist NR ADHD patients supports the NR Pallucchini, observational diagnosed with ADHD pharmacotherapy therapy alone without without stimulant study goal
2025 according to DSM-5 (ADHD/NoHUD group) stimulant treatment treatment showed
criteria from two (ADHD+HUD group) greater
outpatient clinics in dysregulation,
Italy: 66 ADHD patients impulsivity, and
without heroin use cocaine use.
disorder (ADHD/NoHUD)
treated in psychiatric
settings with
ADHD-specific
medication, and 37 ADHD
patients with heroin
use disorder (ADHD+HUD)
treated in addiction
services with opioid
agonist therapy but no
stimulant treatment.
All participants were
clinically stable and
retained in care for at
least six months.

Andréia Orjana systematic review 4 Children and Methylphenidate No treatment or NR Methylphenidate was supports the NR Ribeiro adolescents (\< 18 treatment for ADHD placebo consistently study goal
Coutinho, 2024 years old) diagnosed protective against
with ADHD, with or drug use in
without reported children and
consumption of alcohol, adolescents with
tobacco, or drugs, ADHD.
treated with
methylphenidate versus
no treatment or
placebo.

Amber N. narrative review NR College students, Prescription No prescription NR Prescription supports the NR Edinoff, 2022 medical students, stimulant use/misuse stimulant use stimulant misuse study goal
osteopathic students, associated with
pharmacy students, and greater SUD risk
respiratory therapy with no academic
students who use or benefit without
misuse prescription ADHD.
stimulants, both with
and without ADHD
diagnoses.

Greta serial NR Adolescents (13--17 ADHD diagnosis or No ADHD diagnosis or NR Stimulant-UD mixed or PR: 8.8 Bushnell, 2026 cross-sectional years) and young adults stimulant stimulant diagnoses 2--4 inconclusive
(18--24, 25--29 years) prescription prescription times more common
enrolled in Medicaid or with ADHD; 90% of
the Children's Health stimulant-UDs
Insurance Program with lacked ADHD
≥10 months of diagnosis.
enrollment per year
from 42 US states,
excluding those with
dual Medicaid-Medicare
eligibility, without
full Medicaid benefits,
with long-term care
services, or enrolled
in standalone state
CHIPs.

Tanner J retrospective 1541 1,541 children aged 7 Combined stimulant Stimulant medication median 13 years (IQR Combined treatment mixed or aOR: 0.9 (95% Bommersbach, cohort years or younger and psychosocial alone = 9, 17), up to 17 associated with inconclusive CI 0.79--1.01, 2025 diagnosed with ADHD who treatment for years of follow-up lower p=.08) were prescribed a childhood ADHD tobacco/nicotine
stimulant medication use but no
between 2003 and 2019, difference in other
identified from the substance use.
Rochester Epidemiology
Project in Olmsted
County, Minnesota; 72%
male, 79% White, median
age 6.0 years at
stimulant initiation.

---

Per-stage exclusion reasons are summarized below (PRISMA 2020 Item 16b).

Stage Reason Count

---

Title and abstract screening Below Threshold 24

Included studies are stratified by study design below.

Study Type Count

---

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses 4 Observational studies 12 Other study designs 7

3.2 Synthesis of Findings

Note on evidence hierarchy. This review's included set mixes primary studies (RCTs and/or observational designs) with secondary evidence (systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses). Reviewers should consider double-counting risk and weight primary and secondary evidence accordingly.

Longitudinal Cohort Evidence on Stimulant Treatment and Subsequent Substance Use Disorders

The largest and most directly informative primary studies were retrospective and prospective cohorts that followed individuals with ADHD over time. Baweja (2025), drawing on over 1.2 million individuals, reported an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.70 (95% CI 0.65--0.75) for substance use disorders among those who received stimulant treatment --- the strongest quantitative signal of a protective association in this review. By contrast, Rao (2025) found a non-significant overall association (aOR 0.85, 95% CI 0.60--1.20, p = 0.35) for substance use disorders broadly, though stimulant use disorder specifically reached significance (p = 0.019). Bommersbach (2025) reported a similar pattern of non-significance for composite substance use (aOR 0.90, 95% CI 0.79--1.01, p = .08), with only tobacco/nicotine reaching the significance threshold. Molina (2023) likewise yielded inconclusive findings in a smaller cohort. The direction of effect across these studies leans toward reduced or unchanged risk, but the inconsistency across substance-specific outcomes and the variable precision of estimates make the pattern notably heterogeneous. Effect magnitude cannot be characterized quantitatively for several of these studies, which reported no formal effect size.

Timing of Treatment Initiation, Misuse, and Diversion

Several studies examined how the age at which stimulant treatment begins and the context of medication use shape substance-related outcomes. Sean Esteban McCabe (2024, cross-sectional) found that individuals with late-onset, short-duration stimulant treatment had significantly elevated odds of prescription stimulant misuse (AOR 2.47, 95% CI 1.80--3.38), whereas early-onset, long-duration treatment was not significantly associated with cocaine or methamphetamine use relative to population controls. In a separate cohort analysis, McCabe (2024) reported that prescribed stimulant therapy was associated with modestly lower prevalence of prescription stimulant misuse (AOR 0.714, 95% CI 0.516--0.986). Schepis (2023), in a large multi-cohort cross-sectional study, found that individuals prescribed both stimulant and non-stimulant medications had the highest odds of prescription stimulant misuse relative to controls (AOR 3.10, 95% CI 2.66--3.62), while the direct comparison between stimulant-only and non-stimulant-only groups was not significant (AOR 1.10, 95% CI 0.939--1.30). Summit (2025) diverged from the prevailing pattern: at the university level, higher ADHD medication prevalence was associated with slightly higher prescription stimulant misuse (aPR 1.07, 95% CI 1.04--1.09), but the individual-level association was not significant (aPR 0.90, 95% CI 0.78--1.04). These findings are notably heterogeneous, with divergence most apparent across study designs and the specific misuse outcome measured.

Secondary Evidence From Systematic and Scoping Reviews

Five systematic or scoping reviews synthesized prior literature on this question. Żełabowski (2025) and Ribeiro Coutinho (2024) both concluded that stimulant treatment may reduce subsequent substance use risk, though Ribeiro Coutinho noted high heterogeneity (I² = 79%) that precluded meta-analysis and non-significant results for nicotine dependence and alcohol abuse specifically. Warschavsky (2026), synthesizing 51 primary studies, reached mixed conclusions, as did Byrne (2023) across 32 studies. The CDA-AMC (2024) rapid review, limited to a single included study, could not draw firm inferences. The split between reviews reaching supportive versus inconclusive conclusions mirrors the heterogeneity observed in the primary literature. Effect magnitude cannot be characterized quantitatively for most of these reviews, which did not report pooled estimates.

Narrative Reviews, Case Reports, and Observational Descriptions

The remaining studies --- three narrative reviews, two case reports, and two small observational studies --- contributed contextual perspective but limited analytic weight. Edinoff (2022), Srichawla (2022), and Ivanov (2022) each narratively reviewed the relationship between ADHD pharmacotherapy and substance use risk; the first two concluded that treatment may be protective, while Ivanov (2022) characterized the evidence as inconclusive. Pallucchini (2025) and Francis (2022) reported findings from small cross-sectional samples, with Francis observing a medium effect size (Cohen's d = 0.67, 95% CI 0.329--1.007, p \< .001) favoring treated individuals. Findings across this group are broadly consistent in direction but lack the controlled designs and sample sizes needed to inform confident conclusions. The predominance of studies without quantitative effect metrics in this group limits the ability to characterize effect magnitude.

3.3 Certainty of Evidence

The primary outcome was assessed using GRADE. Predominant study design: The corpus is dominated by observational designs --- retrospective cohorts, prospective cohorts, cross-sectional studies, and serial cross-sectional studies --- supplemented by secondary syntheses (systematic reviews, scoping reviews, narrative reviews) and a small number of case reports. No randomized controlled trials are present among the primary empirical studies. (starting certainty: Low). After domain-driven adjustments, the final certainty rating is Very Low.

---

Domain Level Rationale

---

Risk of bias serious Among the primary empirical studies assessed with ROBINS-I, four received an overall judgment of High risk of bias: Baweja (2025), who acknowledged that 'models did not adjust for medical comorbidities' and that selection bias toward healthier patients receiving stimulants was likely; Summit (2025), where non-random university sampling and unmeasured ADHD severity precluded causal inference; Pallucchini (2025), whose groups differed substantially by age and treatment setting with the logistic regression 'not adjusted for key covariates such as age or setting'; and Bommersbach (2025), whose outcome measurement relied on medical records with 'substance use likely underestimated due to reliance on medical records' and 'no structured diagnostic assessments at follow-up.' The remaining empirical studies received Some concerns, driven primarily by self-reported exposure classification (McCabe 2024 cross-sectional; Vita V McCabe 2024; Schepis 2023), inability to adjust for ADHD severity, and confounding by indication. Secondary syntheses and case reports were not amenable to ROBINS-I assessment.

Inconsistency serious Direction of effect is heterogeneous across the corpus. Several studies report protective or null associations: Vita V McCabe (2024) found no statistically significant differences in nonmedical stimulant or cocaine use incidence over six years; Sean Esteban McCabe (2024 cohort) reported an AOR of 0.714 (95% CI: 0.516--0.986) for lower prescription stimulant misuse prevalence among those with adolescent stimulant therapy; and Molina (2023) found no evidence of increased or decreased substance use risk across 16 years using both multilevel and marginal structural models.

Indirectness serious The study pool mixes secondary synthesis studies --- including systematic reviews (Żełabowski 2025; Warschavsky 2026; Coutinho 2024; CDA-AMC 2024), a scoping review (Byrne 2023), and narrative reviews (Ivanov 2022; Srichawla 2022; Edinoff 2022) --- with primary empirical studies, introducing structural indirectness because pooled estimates from reviews are not directly comparable to single-study primary estimates and the evidence bases may overlap. Beyond this methodological mixing, several primary studies diverge from the PICO in clinically meaningful ways: Schepis (2023) and Vita V McCabe (2024) examined any ADHD pharmacotherapy history without isolating stimulant-specific effects, as the exposure 'could not differentiate between stimulant and non-stimulant medications'; Summit (2025) examined university-level medication prevalence as the primary exposure rather than individual prescribed stimulant treatment; Pallucchini (2025) compared ADHD patients with versus without heroin use disorder across different treatment settings rather than directly examining stimulant treatment effects on SUD incidence; and Byrne (2023) focused exclusively on correctional settings, a population not specified in the PICO.

Imprecision serious Imprecision is substantial across the corpus. Several studies with quantitative estimates carry wide confidence intervals: Rao (2025) reported an aOR of 0.85 (95% CI: 0.60--1.20) for overall SUD, spanning the null; Bommersbach (2025) reported an aOR of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.79--1.01), also crossing 1.0 with p = .08; and Francis (2022) reported a Cohen's d of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.329--1.007) from a sample of only 144 participants.

Publication bias serious Without funnel-plot or grey-literature analysis, this assessment is heuristic. Several patterns raise concern.

---

The evidence base for the relationship between prescribed stimulant medications for ADHD and substance use disorder outcomes consists predominantly of observational designs --- retrospective and prospective cohorts, cross-sectional studies, and serial cross-sectional analyses --- with no randomized controlled trials among the primary empirical studies, establishing a starting certainty of Low. All five GRADE domains warranted downgrade: risk of bias was serious, with four primary studies receiving High overall ROBINS-I judgments (Baweja 2025; Summit 2025; Pallucchini 2025; Bommersbach 2025) and pervasive confounding by indication across the remainder; inconsistency was serious, with effect directions ranging from protective (aOR 0.714, McCabe 2024 cohort; null across 16 years, Molina 2023) to markedly elevated risk (AOR 3.10, Schepis 2023); indirectness was serious, reflecting both the structural mixing of secondary syntheses with primary studies and clinically meaningful PICO mismatches in exposure definition and population; imprecision was serious, with multiple estimates crossing the null, a sample as small as 144 (Francis 2022), and high heterogeneity precluding meta-analysis in one systematic review (I² = 79%, Coutinho 2024); and publication bias was serious, supported by a statistically detected Egger's test result (p = 0.013, Coutinho 2024) and heuristic patterns of underrepresentation of null findings. Applying four downgrade steps from a starting certainty of Low yields a final certainty rating of Very Low, indicating that the current evidence is insufficient to draw reliable conclusions about whether prescribed stimulant treatment for ADHD increases, decreases, or does not alter the risk of substance use disorders, and that further well-designed prospective studies with pre-specified outcomes are needed before confident clinical inferences can be drawn.

4. Discussion

Summary of Evidence

This scoping review mapped the available evidence from 23 included studies addressing whether prescribed stimulant treatment for ADHD is associated with altered long-term risk of subsequent substance use disorders. The body of evidence spans large retrospective cohorts, prospective follow-up studies, cross-sectional analyses, systematic and scoping reviews, narrative reviews, case reports, and small observational samples --- a breadth of designs that reflects the scope of inquiry but also introduces considerable heterogeneity in methods, populations, and outcome definitions.

Across the primary longitudinal cohort studies, the direction of effect generally leaned toward a protective or neutral association between stimulant pharmacotherapy and subsequent substance use disorders, though the strength and consistency of this signal varied by substance type and study design. The largest cohort study reported a statistically significant reduction in risk, while several others found non-significant associations for composite substance use outcomes, with only select substance-specific endpoints (e.g., tobacco or stimulant use disorder) reaching conventional significance thresholds. The secondary evidence from prior systematic and scoping reviews was similarly split: some concluded that stimulant treatment may reduce risk, while others characterized the evidence as mixed or inconclusive, often citing high between-study heterogeneity.

Findings related to stimulant misuse and diversion introduced additional complexity. Late-onset and short-duration prescribing patterns appeared to carry higher misuse risk in one large cross-sectional study, whereas early-onset, sustained treatment did not. Ecological analyses at the university level suggested a modest positive association between medication prevalence and misuse, though individual-level data did not confirm this. Taken together, the evidence does not support a straightforward conclusion that stimulant treatment either uniformly increases or decreases substance use risk. The pattern is better characterized as conditionally protective --- potentially dependent on treatment timing, duration, substance-specific outcome, and population characteristics --- but the heterogeneity across designs and outcomes warrants caution in any directional interpretation.

Limitations of this Review

Several methodological features of this scoping review constrain the confidence that can be placed in its findings. First, the search was restricted to articles indexed in PMC Open Access, which excludes studies published behind paywalls or in journals outside this repository. This coverage limitation may have systematically omitted relevant evidence, particularly from non-English-language sources or specialty journals not indexed in PMC. Second, all screening, data extraction, and synthesis were conducted by a single reviewer, introducing the possibility of errors or subjective judgments that dual-reviewer processes are designed to mitigate. Third, given the heterogeneity of study designs, populations, outcome definitions, and analytic approaches across the 23 included studies, this review employed narrative synthesis without statistical pooling. No meta-analysis was performed, and no pooled effect estimates were generated. As a result, the directional patterns described above reflect a qualitative mapping of the evidence landscape rather than a statistically precise summary of effect magnitude.

Implications for Future Research

The evidence gaps identified in this review point toward several concrete research priorities. Large, prospective cohort studies with preregistered analytic plans are needed to clarify whether the protective signal observed in some retrospective data holds under designs less susceptible to confounding by indication and selection bias. These studies should stratify by age at treatment initiation, treatment duration, and specific stimulant formulation --- variables that appeared to modify the association in the included literature but were inconsistently reported. Substance-specific outcomes deserve individual attention; the tendency to collapse alcohol use disorder, cannabis use disorder, nicotine dependence, and illicit drug use into composite endpoints may obscure clinically meaningful differences in risk trajectories. Head-to-head comparisons of stimulant versus non-stimulant pharmacotherapy remain sparse and should be prioritized, as the comparator arm in most included studies was untreated ADHD rather than active non-stimulant treatment. Studies enrolling adults diagnosed with ADHD in adulthood, female participants, and individuals with psychiatric comorbidities are underrepresented in the current evidence base and warrant deliberate inclusion. Finally, standardized measurement of stimulant misuse and diversion as distinct outcomes --- rather than conflating them with substance use disorders broadly --- would sharpen the clinical relevance of future findings.

5. Conclusions

This scoping review identified a body of evidence that, while leaning toward a protective or neutral association between prescribed stimulant treatment for ADHD and subsequent substance use disorders, remains notably heterogeneous and inconsistent across specific substances, study designs, and populations examined. The largest cohort study reported a reduced hazard of substance use disorders among treated individuals, but several other primary studies yielded non-significant composite associations, with only select substance-specific outcomes reaching statistical significance. Findings related to prescription stimulant misuse were particularly variable, with treatment timing and duration appearing to shape risk in ways that differed across samples. Secondary reviews mirrored this inconsistency, splitting between cautiously supportive and inconclusive interpretations. The available evidence is insufficient to support definitive clinical guidance on long-term substance use risk attributable to stimulant pharmacotherapy. Adequately powered prospective studies with standardized outcome definitions, longer follow-up, and attention to treatment timing and psychiatric comorbidity are needed before firm recommendations can be made.

Protocol and Registration

This review was not registered in PROSPERO or another registry. A pre-specified protocol was prepared alongside this review and is available on request; it may be submitted post-hoc to PROSPERO or OSF for registration.

Funding

This review received no specific funding from any agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Data Availability

All extracted data and the verbatim Boolean query used for retrieval are available in the supplementary materials. Source articles are publicly accessible via PubMed / PubMed Central / open-access providers.

References

1. Vinod Rao,Sylvia Lanni,Amy M Yule,Sean E McCabe,Philip T Veliz,Ty S Schepis,Timothy E Wilens Telehealth Prescribing of Stimulants for ADHD and Associated Risk for Later Stimulant and Substance Use Disorders. Am J Psychiatry. 2025;182(8):779-788. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.20240346. PMID: 40495525.
2. Ty S Schepis,Kennedy S Werner,Olivia Figueroa,Vita V McCabe,John E Schulenberg,Phil T Veliz,Timothy E Wilens,Sean Esteban McCabe Type of medication therapy for ADHD and stimulant misuse during adolescence: a cross-sectional multi-cohort national study. EClinicalMedicine. 2023;58:101902. doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.101902. PMID: 36969344.
3. Iliyan Ivanov,James M Bjork,James Blair,Jeffrey H Newcorn Sensitization-based risk for substance abuse in vulnerable individuals with ADHD: Review and re-examination of evidence. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2022;135:104575. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2022.104575. PMID: 35151770.
4. Kacper Żełabowski,Wiktor Petrov,Dawid Ślebioda,Malwina Rusinek,Kamil Biedka,Katarzyna Błaszczyk,Michał Wesołowski,Kacper Wojtysiak,Mateusz Sroka,Zuzanna Ratka,Ignacy Ilski,Agnieszka Chłopaś-Konowałek Holistic Management of Adult ADHD with a History of Addiction: Emphasis on Low-Addiction-Risk Psychopharmacotherapy. J Clin Med. 2025;14(18). doi:10.3390/jcm14186470. PMID: 41010674.
5. Dor Warschavsky Psichoaktyviųjų preparatų skyrimo ypatumai ir terapinės prieigos gydant paauglių bei studentų aktyvumo ir dėmesio sutrikimą Lithuanian University of Health Sciences. 2026.
6. Raman Baweja,Daniel A Waschbusch,Felix M Padilla,Ritika Baweja,Balwinder Singh,William E Pelham,Brooke S G Molina,Timothy E Wilens,James G Waxmonsky Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Treatment Patterns and Association With Clinical Outcomes in Adolescents and Young Adults with Co-occurring Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Substance Use Disorder: A Retrospective Analysis. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2025. doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2025.12.003. PMID: 41421461.
7. Alynna G Summit,Madison C Moseley,Natasha Chaku,Kit K Elam,Wura Jacobs,Alyssa M Lederer,Ellen L Vaughan,Patrick D Quinn Prevalence of pharmacotherapy for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and prescription stimulant misuse: A national study of US college students. Addiction. 2025;120(4):721-731. doi:10.1111/add.16716. PMID: 39552232.
8. Alyssa R Francis,Lisa L Weyandt,Arthur D Anastopoulos,George J DuPaul,Emily Shepard Outcomes and Predictors of Stimulant Misuse in College Students with and Without ADHD. J Atten Disord. 2022;26(5):779-793. doi:10.1177/10870547211027650. PMID: 34189993.
9. Vita V McCabe,Philip T Veliz,Timothy E Wilens,Ty S Schepis,Emily Pasman,Rebecca J Evans-Polce,Sean Esteban McCabe Adolescents' Use of Medications for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Subsequent Risk of Nonmedical Stimulant Use. J Adolesc Health. 2024;75(1):188-191. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2024.01.024. PMID: 38483378.
10. Brooke S G Molina,Traci M Kennedy,Andrea L Howard,James M Swanson,L Eugene Arnold,John T Mitchell,Annamarie Stehli,Edward H Kennedy,Jeffery N Epstein,Lily T Hechtman,Stephen P Hinshaw,Benedetto Vitiello Association Between Stimulant Treatment and Substance Use Through Adolescence Into Early Adulthood. JAMA Psychiatry. 2023;80(9):933-941. doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2023.2157. PMID: 37405756.
11. Bahadar S Srichawla,Chloe C Telles,Melanie Schweitzer,Bilal Darwish Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and Substance Use Disorder: A Narrative Review. Cureus. 2022;14(4):e24068. doi:10.7759/cureus.24068. PMID: 35573587.
12. Cory Byrne,Dale Guenter Treatments for ADHD in adults in jails, prisons and correctional settings: a scoping review of the literature. Health Justice. 2023;11(1):36. doi:10.1186/s40352-023-00234-9. PMID: 37676388.
13. C. De Andrés Lobo,C. Vallecillo Adame,T. Jiménez Aparicio,M. Queipo De Llano De La Viuda,G. Guerra Valera,Ángel Ramı́rez,M. Fernández Lozano,N. Navarro Barriga,M. J. Mateos Sexmero,B. Rodríguez Rodríguez,Miguel Valcárcel,M. Andreo Vidal,M. P. Pando Fernández,Patricia Gimeno,Isabel de la Montaña Santos Carrasco,J. I. Gonçalves Cerejeira,A. Rodríguez Campos Late diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and cocaine abuse European Psychiatry. 2023. doi:10.1192/j.eurpsy.2023.735.
14. Sean Esteban McCabe,Olivia Figueroa,Vita V McCabe,Ty S Schepis,John E Schulenberg,Philip T Veliz,Kennedy S Werner,Timothy E Wilens Is age of onset and duration of stimulant therapy for ADHD associated with cocaine, methamphetamine, and prescription stimulant misuse? J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2024;65(1):100-111. doi:10.1111/jcpp.13807. PMID: 37062713.
15. Sean Esteban McCabe,John E Schulenberg,Timothy E Wilens,Ty S Schepis,Kennedy S Werner,Vita V McCabe,Philip T Veliz Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Stimulant Therapy and Prescription Drug Misuse During Transition to Young Adulthood. Psychiatr Serv. 2024;75(7):622-629. doi:10.1176/appi.ps.20230418. PMID: 38321920.
16. CDA-AMC Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Medications for Adults Canadian Journal of Health Technologies. 2024. doi:10.51731/cjht.2024.1035.
17. Icro Maremmani,Vincenza Spera,Marco Maiello,Angelo G I Maremmani,Giulio Perugi Adult Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder/Substance Use Disorder Dual Disorder Patients: A Dual Disorder Unit Point of View. Curr Top Behav Neurosci. 2022;57:179-198. doi:10.1007/7854_2022_335. PMID: 35507285.
18. Julie P Gentile Adult ADHD: A Brief Review Journal of Quality in Health Care & Economics. 2022. doi:10.23880/jqhe-16000273.
19. Alessandro Pallucchini,Maurizio Varese,Irene Pergentini,Samuele Gemignani,Elisa Parapetto,Icro Maremmani,Angelo Giovanni Icro Maremmani Stimulant Treatment Gap in ADHD Patients with Heroin Use Disorder: Clinical and Behavioural Consequences. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2025;23(1). doi:10.3390/ijerph23010040. PMID: 41595834.
20. Andréia Orjana Ribeiro Coutinho,Maria Cristina Bento,Dídia Cruz,José Chen-Xu Effect of methylphenidate on substance use disorders in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a systematic review Portuguese Journal of Pediatrics. 2024. doi:10.24875/pjp.23000048.
21. Amber N. Edinoff,Catherine A. Nix,Shawn E. McNeil,Sarah Wagner,Catherine A Johnson,Brooke C. Williams,Elyse M. Cornett,Kevin S. Murnane,Adam M. Kaye,Alan D. Kaye Prescription Stimulants in College and Medical Students: A Narrative Review of Misuse, Cognitive Impact, and Adverse Effects Psychiatry International. 2022. doi:10.3390/psychiatryint3030018.
22. Greta Bushnell,Katherine M Keyes,Yuyang Zhu,Magdalena Cerdá,Tobias Gerhard,Deborah Hasin,Alicia Iizuka,Kristen Lloyd,Hillary Samples,Mark Olfson Stimulant Use Disorder Diagnoses in Adolescent and Young Adult Medicaid Enrollees. JAMA Psychiatry. 2026;83(2):196-201. doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2025.2864. PMID: 41091493.
23. Tanner J Bommersbach,Maria Saliba,Casey K Gilman,Allison LeMahieu,Idil Tarikogullari,Hayrunnisa Unlu,Kierstin S Utter,Pravesh Sharma,Magdalena Romanowicz,Osama Abulseoud Does Combined Stimulant and Psychosocial Treatment in Childhood Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Protect Against Future Substance Use? JAACAP Open. 2025;3(4):1202-1212. doi:10.1016/j.jaacop.2025.05.004. PMID: 41367958.

Appendix A — PRISMA 2020 Checklist

Appendix B — Reviewer Worklist

Suggested citation

Krasnova M. Evidence Review: Prescribed Stimulant Treatment for ADHD and Long-Term Risk of Substance Use Disorders margaritakrasnovamd.com. Last reviewed 2026-06-21. Available at: https://margaritakrasnovamd.com/evidence-review/adhd-stimulants-substance-use-risk.html