Familial Aggregation of ADHD Characteristics

Patterns of familial aggregation of ADHD symptoms in parents of ADHD and non-ADHD children were examined. Within the ADHD sample, symptom aggregation was examined as a function of biological relationship, parent and child gender, and children's comorbid diagnoses. Participants consisted of parents of 579 children with ADHD, Combined Type participating in the multimodal treatment study of children with ADHD and parents of 288 normal control participants. Adult symptoms of ADHD were measured by both self-report and report of a significant other. Results indicated that the parents of children with ADHD had higher ratings of inattention/cognitive problems, hyperactivity/restlessness, impulsivity/emotional lability, and lower self-concept than parents of children without ADHD on both self-report and other-report ratings. Within the ADHD sample of children, other-report ratings of inattention/cognitive problems and impulsivity/emotional lability were higher for biological parents compared to nonbiological parents whereas self-ratings were not related to biological status. These findings support previous research documenting familial aggregation of ADHD and appear to strengthen the hypothesis that there is a genetic contribution to ADHD.     

Developmental change in the relation between executive functions and symptoms of ADHD and co‐occurring behaviour problems

In a sample of 92 children aged 6–13 years this study investigates the normal developmental change in the relation between executive functioning (EF) and the core behavioural symptoms associated with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (hyperactivity/impulsivity and inattention) as well as symptoms often co‐occurring with childhood hyperactivity (conduct‐ and internalizing problems). EF was assessed by using multiple tests grouped through prior factor analysis, resulting in cognitive measures relating to disinhibition, speed/arousal, verbal working memory, non‐verbal working memory, and fluency. The results showed that although disinhibition was positively related to hyperactivity/impulsivity and inattention mainly for the youngest age group, there were no significant age effects for these relations. Instead, age effects were found for the relations between speed/arousal and inattention as well as for the relations between verbal working memory/fluency and inattention. In the oldest age group poor performance on these cognitive measures was associated with high ratings of inattention. For the total sample a relation was obtained between disinhibition and hyperactivity/impulsivity as well as between both working memory measures and internalizing problems. In conclusion, the results from this study suggest that poor inhibition is most clearly associated with ADHD symptoms for younger children, whereas poor functioning with regard to later developing and more complex executive functions such as working memory and fluency is associated with ADHD symptoms for older children. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The validity of vigilance tasks in differential diagnosis of children referred for attention and learning problems

This study was conducted to evaluate the convergent and discriminant validity of vigilance measures of attention and impulsivity in children. One hundred children referred for evaluation of attention and learning problems were administered a battery of tests including two vigilance tasks, other laboratory measures of inattention and impulsivity, and parent and teacher ratings. It was predicted that vigilance task performance would correlate with teacher ratings and laboratory measures of inattention while correlations with ratings of aggressive behavior were predicted to be lower. Moderate correlations were obtained between the vigilance task scores and other laboratory measures of inattention and impulsivity. However, the vigilance scores did not correlate with teacher or parent ratings of behavior. A factor analysis, conducted to identify underlying dimensions of attention in the battery of tests, revealed strong source effects. The implications for use of vigilance measures in diagnosis are discussed.Portions of this paper were presented at the 1990 Learning Disabilities Association of America International Conference, Anaheim, California.     

Waiting impulsivity: a distinctive feature of ADHD neuropsychology?

Impulsivity is a core feature of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). It has been conceptualized in a number of different ways. In the current article, we examine how the new concept of “waiting impulsivity”, which refers to premature responding before a scheduled target appears, adds to our understanding of impulsivity in ADHD. Sixty children (8–12 years old; 30 ADHD; 30 typically developing controls) completed the 4-choice serial reaction time task, a measure of waiting impulsivity, alongside tasks measuring inhibitory control and temporal discounting and questionnaires measuring behavioral disorder symptoms, delay aversion, and various aspects of impulsivity. A multiple logistic regression model was used to explore the contribution of the primary task outcomes to predict group membership. Children with ADHD displayed more waiting impulsivity and less inhibitory control; they did not differ in temporal discounting. There was no correlation between waiting impulsivity and inhibitory control. Waiting impulsivity was correlated with parent-reported ratings of hyperactivity/impulsivity, inattention, oppositional defiant disorder (ODD), and conduct disorder (CD) and with self-reported delay aversion ratings. Only waiting impulsivity was a significant predictor of ADHD status. In conclusion, waiting impulsivity is distinct from inhibitory control deficits and predicts ADHD status independently of it. Future research needs to examine the relationship with delay aversion and ODD/CD more thoroughly.     

Equivalence of mother and father ratings of ADHD in children

Obtaining data from multiple informants provides a more comprehensive diagnostic picture in the assessment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Differences in symptom ratings have been observed between parent- and teacher-report scales, though less information is available regarding differences between mothers and fathers. To address this gap, this study examines the rater agreement between mothers and fathers on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders – Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) ADHD Symptom Rating Scale (DSM-ADHD-SRS). The participants consisted of 337 children diagnosed with ADHD who underwent comprehensive neuropsychological assessment. Confirmatory factor analysis indicates that a three-factor model comprising inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity symptoms provides the best fit for both mothers’ and fathers’ ratings. Mothers provided higher mean ratings for the inattention scale. These results suggest that the factor structure for the DSM-ADHD-SRS is the same, regardless of parent gender. However, symptoms of inattention may vary depending upon which parent completes the ratings. This discrepancy could lead to differences in diagnostic impressions in clinical evaluations.     

Accuracy of drawing in a dual-task and resistance-to-distraction study: motor or attention deficit?

To determine whether manual incoordination is caused by attention deficit or not, we used an accuracy drawing task as a primary task in dual-task and resistance-to-distraction studies, and examined if thus measured attention could differentiate inattention (IA) and combined (CO) subtypes of ADHD. The secondary tasks and distractions failed to lower the primary task performance in IA, CO and control groups. We also compared the impairment scores of the accuracy drawing tasks from the Movement Assessment Battery for Children [Henderson, S. E., & Sugden, D. A. (1992). Movement assessment battery for children. London: Psychological Corporation.] between the groups with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and/or developmental coordination disorder-inaccurate drawing type (DCD-ID). There were no group differences in the impairment score between the control and the ADHD groups, and between ADHD and ADHD plus DCD-ID groups. We concluded that inaccurate drawing is not caused by attention deficit, but that it is a manifestation of a motor deficit as a separate entity from attention deficit.     

Reliable Ratings or Reading Tea Leaves: Can Parent,Teacher, and Clinician Behavioral Ratings of Preschoolers Predict ADHD at Age Six?

To assess the relative ability of parent, teacher, and clinician behavioral ratings of preschoolers to predict ADHD severity and diagnosis at 6 years of age. Hyperactive/inattentive preschoolers [N?=?104, 75 % boys, Mean (SD) age?=?4.37 (0.47) years] were followed over 2 years (mean?=?26.44 months, SD?=?5.66). At baseline (BL), parents and teachers completed the ADHD-RS-IV and clinicians completed the Behavioral Rating Inventory for Children following a psychological testing session. At age 6, [Mean (SD) age?=?6.62 (0.35) years], parents were interviewed with the K-SADS-PL; teachers completed the ADHD-RS-IV; and laboratory measures of hyperactivity, impulsivity, and inattention were obtained from children. Hierarchical logistic and linear regression analyses examined which combination of BL ratings best predicted 6-year-old ADHD diagnosis and severity, respectively. At age 6, 56 (53.8 %) children met DSM-IV criteria for a diagnosis of ADHD. BL ratings from parent/teacher/clinician, parent/teacher and parent/clinician combinations significantly predicted children who had an ADHD diagnosis at age 6. Parent and clinician, but not teacher, behavior ratings were significant independent predictors of ADHD diagnosis and severity at 6-years-old. However, only clinician reports of preschoolers’ behaviors predicted laboratory measures of over-activity and inattention at follow-up. Cross-situationality is important for a diagnosis of ADHD during the preschool years. Among parents, teachers and clinicians, positive endorsements from all three informants, parent/teacher or parent/clinician appear to have prognostic value. Clinicians’ ratings of preschoolers’ inattention, impulsivity and hyperactivity are valid sources of information for predicting ADHD diagnosis and severity over time.     

Teachers' screening for attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder: comparing multinational samples on teacher ratings of ADHD

This study evaluates a measurement model for Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). The DSM-IV divides 18 symptoms into two groups, inattentive and hyperactive/impulsive. Elementary school teachers rated 21,161 children in 4 locations: Spain, Germany, urban US, and suburban US. Confirmatory factor analysis suggested that the 2-factor model (inattention, hyperactivity/impulsivity) shows the best fit. A third factor, impulsivity, was too slight to stand-alone. Children with academic performance problems were distinguished by inattention, but children with behavior problems typically had elevations in inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity. Between-site differences were statistically significant, but so small that we conclude that same measurement model fits all 4 samples in 2 continents.     

Treatment of children with ADHD: psychopedagogical program at school versus psychostimulant medication

This study examined the impact of medication management compared to a psycho-educational program on parent and teacher ratings of children with combined type ADHD. The study lasted 14 weeks and included 50 children. 17 children took medication, 17 received psycho-educational intervention, and 16 children were assigned to the control group. The measures used were the IOWA Conners Scale, the School Problem Inventory, the Abbreviated Conners, and the DSM-IV Inattention-Disorganization and Hyperactivity-Impulsivity rating scales. Regarding teacher ratings, improvements were observed on: a) inattention and school problems in the medication group versus the control group; and b) hyperactivity symptoms in the psycho-pedagogical group versus the control and medication groups. Regarding to parent ratings, improvements were observed on: a)inattention in the psycho-pedagogical group versus the control and medication groups; and b) hyperactivity symptoms in the psycho-pedagogical group versus the control and the medication groups.     

Agreement Between Parent and Teacher Ratings of Disruptive Behavior Disorders in Children with Clinically Diagnosed ADHD

This study investigated the agreement between parent and teacher ratings of DSM-IV symptoms of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and related disorders: Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) and Conduct Disorder (CD). A sample of 55 children in the age range of 6–12 years with clinically diagnosed ADHD participated in the study. Parents and teachers were asked to complete the Disruptive Behavior Disorder Rating Scale (DBDRS; W. E., Pelham, E. M., Gnagy, K. E., Greenslade, & R. Milich, 1992). No association was found between parent and teacher ratings of inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity. However, moderate to high levels of agreement were obtained for ratings of symptoms that characterized ODD and CD. The observed low levels of agreement between parent and teacher ratings of ADHD symptoms may be attributed to different perceptions of the problem behavior by parents and teachers, medication effects, or the situation specificity of children's behavior. It is recommended that the diagnostic criterion of symptom pervasiveness for the diagnosis of ADHD be operationalized more clearly.     

Assessing inattention and impulsivity in children during the Go/NoGo task

Behavioural performance in the Go/NoGo task was compared with caregiver and teacher reports of inattention and hyperactivity‐impulsivity in 1,151 children (N=557 boys; N=594 girls) age 9–10 years old. Errors of commission (NoGo errors) were significantly correlated with symptom counts of hyperactivity‐impulsivity, while errors of omission (Go errors) were significantly correlated with symptom counts for inattention in both caregiver and teacher reports. Cross‐correlations were also evident, however, such that errors of commission were related to inattention symptoms, and errors of omission were related to hyperactivity‐impulsivity. Moreover, hyperactivity‐impulsivity and inattention symptoms were highly intercorrelated in both caregiver (r=.52) and teacher reports (r=.70), while errors of commission and omission were virtually uncorrelated in the Go/NoGo task (r=.06). The results highlight the difficulty in disentangling hyperactivity‐impulsivity and inattention in questionnaires, and suggest that these constructs may be more clearly distinguished in laboratory measures such as the Go/NoGo task.     

The relationship of compliance with inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity

The aim of the study was to investigate the relationship between Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity symptoms in predicting compliance. It was hypothesised that inattention symptoms are a better predictor of compliance than hyperactivity/impulsivity. There were two different groups of participants: 367 college students (both males and females) and 89 male prisoners. All participants had completed the Gudjonsson Compliance Scale (GCS) and the DSM-IV-TR (Screening) Checklist for adult ADHD symptoms. Significant correlations emerged between compliance and ADHD symptoms, but the correlations were higher for inattention than hyperactivity/impulsivity among both samples. This was confirmed by multiple regression analyses (hierarchical), which showed that the variance in compliance explained by ADHD inattention versus hyperactivity/impulsivity symptoms increased from 2% to 8% for college students and 8% to 24% for prisoners after entering inattention into the model (hyperactivity/impulsivity was entered first in the regression models). The findings suggest that inattention is a more powerful predictor of compliance than hyperactivity/impulsivity. This is a novel and an important finding.     

A Preliminary Study of ADHD Symptoms and Correlates: Do Abused Children Differ from Nonabused Children?

In this pilot study, differences in inattention, impulsivity, and hyperactivity as well as demographic factors were investigated in a community sample of 8- through 11-year-olds, approximately half of whom had experienced child abuse or neglect. Parents completed the Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Test, the SNAP-IV, the Brief Betrayal Trauma Survey – Parent version, and additional questions. Abused children had more severe impulsivity and inattention, but not hyperactivity, symptoms. Abused boys and girls had a similar age of onset of symptoms, whereas nonabused girls had a much later age of onset than nonabused boys. ADHD is a significant problem among maltreated children. These data support large scale studies investigating possible differences in etiology, presentation, and treatment.     

Test-Retest Measurement Invariance of Clinic Referred Children’s ADHD Symptoms

This study examined the test-retest measurement invariance of ratings of the ADHD symptoms. Mothers of a group of 217 clinic-referred children (boys?=?169, girls?=?49; age range?=?7 to 17 years) completed ratings of the ADHD symptoms presented in a modified version of the Strengths and Weaknesses of ADHD-Symptoms and Normal Behavior Scale (SWAN-M) twice, 12 months apart. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of their ratings at both time points provided more support for the bifactor model of ADHD [orthogonal general and specific factors for inattention (IA) and hyperactivity/impulsivity (HI) symptoms] over the 2-factor oblique model (factors for inattention IA and HI symptoms). For the bifactor model, measurement invariance testing using multiple-group CFA indicated support for configural and full scalar test-retest invariance when the chi-square difference test was applied. For metric invariance, all but one symptom showed invariance. When the differences in approximate fit indices were applied, there was support for full measurement invariance (configural, metric and scalar). The findings indicate that observed scores (based on maternal ratings of the SWAM-M), twelve months apart, are comparable as they have the same measurement properties. Several practical, theoretical, research and clinical implications of the findings are discussed.     

Dimensions and Correlates of Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Sluggish Cognitive Tempo

The present study examined Sluggish Cognitive Tempo (SCT) in relation to ADHD symptoms, clinical diagnosis, and multiple aspects of adjustment in a clinical sample. Parent and teacher reports were gathered for 322 children and adolescents evaluated for behavioral, emotional, and/or learning problems at a university clinic. Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) supported the presence of three separate, but correlated factors (SCT, inattention, and hyperactivity/impulsivity) in both parent and teacher ratings. As expected, SCT symptoms were greatest in youth with ADHD Inattentive type, but were also found in non-ADHD clinical groups. SCT symptoms were related to inattention, internalizing, and social problems across both parent and teacher informants; for parent reports, SCT was also related to more externalizing problems. Findings support the statistical validity of the SCT construct, but its clinical utility is still unclear.     

The Effects of Childhood ADHD Symptoms on Early-onset Substance Use: A Swedish Twin Study

Research has documented that children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are at increased risk of substance use problems. Few studies, however, have focused on early-onset substance use. This study therefore investigated how the two symptom dimensions of ADHD (hyperactivity/impulsivity and inattention) are associated with early-onset substance use, the role of persistent ADHD for the association, and to what extent the association is influenced by genetic and environmental factors. Twins (1,480 pairs) in the Swedish Twin Study of Child and Adolescent Development were followed from childhood to adolescence. ADHD symptoms were measured at age 8–9 and age 13–14 via parent-report, whereas substance use was assessed at age 13–14 via self-report. Results revealed that hyperactive/impulsive symptoms predicted early-onset “sometimes” tobacco use (adjusted odds ratios, 1.12, for one symptom count), controlling for inattentive symptoms and conduct problem behaviors. There is no independent effect of inattentive symptoms on early-onset substance use. Children with persistent hyperactivity/impulsivity (defined as scoring above the 75th percentile at both time points) had a pronounced risk of both early-onset tobacco and alcohol use (adjusted odds ratios from 1.86 to 3.35, compared to the reference group). The associations between hyperactivity/impulsivity and early-onset substance use were primarily influenced by genetic factors. Our results indicated that hyperactivity/impulsivity, but not inattention, is an important early predictor for early-onset substance use, and a shared genetic susceptibility is suggested to explain this association.     

A Comparison of the Neuropsychological Profiles of the DSM-IV Subtypes of ADHD

Recent research on the DSM-IV subtypes of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has demonstrated that the subtypes differ in demographic characteristics, types of functional impairment, and profiles of comorbidity with other childhood disorders. However, little research has tested whether the subtypes differ in underlying neuropsychological deficits. This study compared the neuropsychological profiles of children without ADHD (n = 82) and children who met symptom criteria for DSM-IV Predominantly Inattentive subtype (ADHD-IA; n = 67), Predominantly Hyperactive Impulsive subtype (ADHD-HI; n = 14), and Combined subtype (ADHD-C; n = 33) in the areas of processing speed, vigilance, and inhibition. We hypothesized that children with elevations of inattention symptoms (ADHD-IA and ADHD-C) would be impaired on measures of vigilance and processing speed, whereas children with significant hyperactivity/impulsivity (ADHD-HI and ADHD-C) would be impaired on measures of inhibition. Contrary to prediction, symptoms of inattention best predicted performance on all dependent measures, and ADHD-IA and ADHD-C children had similar profiles of impairment. In contrast, children with ADHD-HI were not significantly impaired on any dependent measures once subclinical symptoms of inattention were controlled. Our results do not support distinct neuropsychological deficits in ADHD-IA and ADHD-C children, and suggest that symptoms of inattention, rather than symptoms of hyperactivity/impulsivity, are associated with neuropsychological impairment.     

Evidence for a General ADHD Factor from a Longitudinal General School Population Study

Recent factor analytic studies in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) have shown that hierarchical models provide a better fit of ADHD symptoms than correlated models. A hierarchical model includes a general ADHD factor and specific factors for inattention, and hyperactivity/impulsivity. The aim of this 12-month longitudinal study was to test the generalizability of the hierarchical models of ADHD within an elementary school population of 6–9 year old children (250 boys, 260 girls). Examination of differences as a function of informant (parent vs. teacher ratings), sex, and time was conducted. Six potential factor structures for the 18 items of the SWAN (Strengths and Weaknesses of ADHD-symptoms and Normal-behavior) scale were tested using confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses. Hierarchical models with a general ADHD factor and two or three specific factors best accounted for parent and teacher reports of symptoms for both boys and girls and at two time points separated by a 12-month interval. Findings indicate that the 18 SWAN items measure a common latent trait as well as orthogonal factors or dimensions of inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity.     

Relations between hyperactive and aggressive behavior and peer relations at three elementary grade levels

Sociometrics and teacher ratings of hyperactivity and aggression were obtained on 390 boys in grades 1– 6 to explore the relative contributions of hyperactivity and aggression to children's social adjustment. Both hyperactivity and aggression were correlated with negative sociometric nominations at all grade levels; however, only hyperactivity showed consistent inverse correlations with positive sociometric nominations. In multiple regression analyses, hyperactivity contributed incremental variance to the prediction of problematic sociometric status at all grade levels, while aggression did so only at grades 3– 4. An examination of the core symptoms of hyperactivity revealed that motor hyperactivity, in the absence of impulsivity and inattention, did not predict negative sociometric status at any grade level. Subgroups of boys categorized as hyperactive only, aggressive only, hyperactive/aggressive, and nonhyperactive/nonaggressive controls were compared on teacher ratings and sociometrics. Hyperactive/aggressive boys had higher hyperactivity and aggression ratings than boys in either of the single- problem groups; all three behavior problem groups had more negative social status than controls. Developmental changes in children's normative expectations for social behavior were discussed as possible mechanisms mediating the age- related differences in relations among aggression, hyperactivity, and peer relations.This research is based on a dissertation submitted by the first author in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Ph.D. degree in clinical psychology at The Pennsylvania State University. The investigation was supported in part by an NIMH postdoctoral training grant No. MH-15151 made to the first author during a fellowship in the Division of Behavioral Pediatrics of Albert Einstein College of Medicine, and a Faculty Scholars in Mental Health of Children award made by The William T. Grant Foundation to the second author.Appreciation is expressed to the fellowing individuals for their assistance in data collecting and scoring: Rosanna D'Alession, John D'Orazio, Chris Doran, Linda Goldstein, Joel Kasper, Lisa Kovacs, Heidi Linz, Kathryn McPherson, Grant Miller, Sue Skalaban, Helene Streitfield. The additional organizational and administrative assistance of Linda Goldstein and Kathryn McPherson is gratefully acknowledged. Finally, we are especially thankful for the cooperation and support of the faculty and students at Linntown Elementary School in the Lewisburg Area School District, the Bellwood-Antis Elementary Schools in the Bellwood-Antis School District, and Lincoln Elementary School in the Tyrone Area School District.     

The Factor Structure of ADHD – Different Models,Analyses and Informants in a Bifactor Framework

The methodological approach of exploratory structural equation modelling (ESEM) has only been applied once to the construct of Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). We decided to compare bifactor models based on confirmatory factor analyses (Bi-CFA) and exploratory equation modeling (Bi-ESEM) only, as there is a growing support of a bifactor structure of ADHD. To examine the factorial validity of the construct we compared three possible bifactor models. One model with two specific factors (inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity), another model with three specific factors (inattention, hyperactivity and impulsivity) and an alternative, incomplete model with one general ADHD and two specific factors (inattention and impulsivity). We used parent- (N = 1386; Age: M = 11.70, SD = 3.18; Sex: 74.5 % male) and teacher-ratings (N = 110; Age: M = 11.27, SD = 3.04; Sex: 77.5 % male) from clinically referred children between the age of 6 and 18. The results indicate that both methods lead to equally good model fit and for both informants the reliable variance of the specific factor hyperactivity is almost completely explained by the general factor. However, in the teacher condition cross-loadings seem to be of particular importance. Across both methods and informants covariation among ADHD symptom items can be in most part attributed to a general ADHD factor as well as to three (inattention, hyperactivity and impulsivity) or two (inattention and impulsivity) weakly defined specific factors. Further research regarding associations between the specific factors of ADHD and other disorders (e.g. conduct disorder) should be conducted.