MinKyoung Song1, Nathan F Dieckmann2, Joel T Nigg3. 1. School of Nursing, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, USA. 2. School of Nursing and School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, USA. 3. Departments of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neuroscience at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, USA.
Abstract
Objective: Among U.S. children, ADHD epidemiological estimates (3%-5%) vary significantly from case identification rates (over 11%), leading to confusion about true incidence and prevalence. We investigated the extent to which this discrepancy could be resolved by definitional issues through reexamining the most cited U.S. survey of case identification, the National Survey of Children's Health (NSCH). Method: Using NSCH 2007/2008 and 2011/2012, we stratified identification of ADHD by current status, severity, psychiatric comorbidity, and ADHD medication usage. Using those criteria, definitional strength was coded into "Definite," "Probable," "Doubtful," and "No." Results: "Definite" ADHD in caseness in 2007/2008 was 4.04%, increasing to 5.49% in 2011/2012, roughly corresponding to epidemiological estimates. "Definite" ADHD was the primary contributor to an overall increase in caseness over that period. Conclusion: This analysis strengthens understanding of discrepancies in estimated ADHD rates. When low confidence identification is considered false positives, ADHD case identification rates match epidemiological estimates more closely.
Objective: Among U.S. children, ADHD epidemiological estimates (3%-5%) vary significantly from case identification rates (over 11%), leading to confusion about true incidence and prevalence. We investigated the extent to which this discrepancy could be resolved by definitional issues through reexamining the most cited U.S. survey of case identification, the National Survey of Children's Health (NSCH). Method: Using NSCH 2007/2008 and 2011/2012, we stratified identification of ADHD by current status, severity, psychiatric comorbidity, and ADHD medication usage. Using those criteria, definitional strength was coded into "Definite," "Probable," "Doubtful," and "No." Results: "Definite" ADHD in caseness in 2007/2008 was 4.04%, increasing to 5.49% in 2011/2012, roughly corresponding to epidemiological estimates. "Definite" ADHD was the primary contributor to an overall increase in caseness over that period. Conclusion: This analysis strengthens understanding of discrepancies in estimated ADHD rates. When low confidence identification is considered false positives, ADHD case identification rates match epidemiological estimates more closely.
Entities:
Keywords:
ADHD; NSCH; and case identification; prevalence
Authors: Guilherme Polanczyk; Maurício Silva de Lima; Bernardo Lessa Horta; Joseph Biederman; Luis Augusto Rohde Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Mark L Wolraich; David E Bard; Martin T Stein; Jerry L Rushton; Karen G O'Connor Journal: J Atten Disord Date: 2009-08-25 Impact factor: 3.256
Authors: Stephen J Blumberg; Erin B Foster; Alicia M Frasier; Jennifer Satorius; Ben J Skalland; Kari L Nysse-Carris; Heather M Morrison; Sadeq R Chowdhury; Kathleen S O'Connor Journal: Vital Health Stat 1 Date: 2012-06
Authors: Christian Kieling; Renata R Kieling; Luis Augusto Rohde; Paul J Frick; Terrie Moffitt; Joel T Nigg; Rosemary Tannock; Francisco Xavier Castellanos Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Stephen V Faraone; Tobias Banaschewski; David Coghill; Yi Zheng; Joseph Biederman; Mark A Bellgrove; Jeffrey H Newcorn; Martin Gignac; Nouf M Al Saud; Iris Manor; Luis Augusto Rohde; Li Yang; Samuele Cortese; Doron Almagor; Mark A Stein; Turki H Albatti; Haya F Aljoudi; Mohammed M J Alqahtani; Philip Asherson; Lukoye Atwoli; Sven Bölte; Jan K Buitelaar; Cleo L Crunelle; David Daley; Søren Dalsgaard; Manfred Döpfner; Stacey Espinet; Michael Fitzgerald; Barbara Franke; Manfred Gerlach; Jan Haavik; Catharina A Hartman; Cynthia M Hartung; Stephen P Hinshaw; Pieter J Hoekstra; Chris Hollis; Scott H Kollins; J J Sandra Kooij; Jonna Kuntsi; Henrik Larsson; Tingyu Li; Jing Liu; Eugene Merzon; Gregory Mattingly; Paulo Mattos; Suzanne McCarthy; Amori Yee Mikami; Brooke S G Molina; Joel T Nigg; Diane Purper-Ouakil; Olayinka O Omigbodun; Guilherme V Polanczyk; Yehuda Pollak; Alison S Poulton; Ravi Philip Rajkumar; Andrew Reding; Andreas Reif; Katya Rubia; Julia Rucklidge; Marcel Romanos; J Antoni Ramos-Quiroga; Arnt Schellekens; Anouk Scheres; Renata Schoeman; Julie B Schweitzer; Henal Shah; Mary V Solanto; Edmund Sonuga-Barke; César Soutullo; Hans-Christoph Steinhausen; James M Swanson; Anita Thapar; Gail Tripp; Geurt van de Glind; Wim van den Brink; Saskia Van der Oord; Andre Venter; Benedetto Vitiello; Susanne Walitza; Yufeng Wang Journal: Neurosci Biobehav Rev Date: 2021-02-04 Impact factor: 9.052