Prevalence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

382 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Overdiagnosis and underdiagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are widely debated, fueled by variations in prevalence estimates across countries, time, and broadening diagnostic criteria. We conducted a meta-analysis to: establish a benchmark pooled prevalence for ADHD; examine whether estimates have increased with publication of different editions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM); and explore the effect of study features on prevalence. METHODS: Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for studies with point prevalence estimates of ADHD. We included studies of children that used the diagnostic criteria from DSM-III, DSM-III-R and DSM-IV in any language. Data were extracted on sampling procedure, sample characteristics, assessors, measures, and whether full or partial criteria were met. RESULTS: The 175 eligible studies included 179 ADHD prevalence estimates with an overall pooled estimate of 7.2% (95% confidence interval: 6.7 to 7.8), and no statistically significant difference between DSM editions. In multivariable analyses, prevalence estimates for ADHD were lower when using the revised third edition of the DSM compared with the fourth edition (P =.03) and when studies were conducted in Europe compared with North America (P =.04). Few studies used population sampling with random selection. Most were from single towns or regions, thus limiting generalizability. CONCLUSIONS: Our review provides a benchmark prevalence estimate for ADHD. If population estimates of ADHD diagnoses exceed our estimate, then overdiagnosis may have occurred for some children. If fewer, then underdiagnosis may have occurred.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)e994-e1001
JournalPediatrics
Volume135
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Apr 2015

Fingerprint

Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity
Meta-Analysis
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
Benchmarking
North America
Population
Publications
Language
Confidence Intervals

Cite this

@article{cab4a6338f9548d4a96ab430d5570ecf,
title = "Prevalence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis",
abstract = "BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Overdiagnosis and underdiagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are widely debated, fueled by variations in prevalence estimates across countries, time, and broadening diagnostic criteria. We conducted a meta-analysis to: establish a benchmark pooled prevalence for ADHD; examine whether estimates have increased with publication of different editions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM); and explore the effect of study features on prevalence. METHODS: Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for studies with point prevalence estimates of ADHD. We included studies of children that used the diagnostic criteria from DSM-III, DSM-III-R and DSM-IV in any language. Data were extracted on sampling procedure, sample characteristics, assessors, measures, and whether full or partial criteria were met. RESULTS: The 175 eligible studies included 179 ADHD prevalence estimates with an overall pooled estimate of 7.2{\%} (95{\%} confidence interval: 6.7 to 7.8), and no statistically significant difference between DSM editions. In multivariable analyses, prevalence estimates for ADHD were lower when using the revised third edition of the DSM compared with the fourth edition (P =.03) and when studies were conducted in Europe compared with North America (P =.04). Few studies used population sampling with random selection. Most were from single towns or regions, thus limiting generalizability. CONCLUSIONS: Our review provides a benchmark prevalence estimate for ADHD. If population estimates of ADHD diagnoses exceed our estimate, then overdiagnosis may have occurred for some children. If fewer, then underdiagnosis may have occurred.",
author = "Rae Thomas and Sharon Sanders and Jenny Doust and Elaine Beller and Paul Glasziou",
year = "2015",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1542/peds.2014-3482",
language = "English",
volume = "135",
pages = "e994--e1001",
journal = "Pediatrics",
issn = "0031-4005",
publisher = "AMER ACAD PEDIATRICS",
number = "4",

}

Prevalence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder : A systematic review and meta-analysis. / Thomas, Rae; Sanders, Sharon; Doust, Jenny; Beller, Elaine; Glasziou, Paul.

In: Pediatrics, Vol. 135, No. 4, 01.04.2015, p. e994-e1001.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Prevalence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

T2 - A systematic review and meta-analysis

AU - Thomas, Rae

AU - Sanders, Sharon

AU - Doust, Jenny

AU - Beller, Elaine

AU - Glasziou, Paul

PY - 2015/4/1

Y1 - 2015/4/1

N2 - BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Overdiagnosis and underdiagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are widely debated, fueled by variations in prevalence estimates across countries, time, and broadening diagnostic criteria. We conducted a meta-analysis to: establish a benchmark pooled prevalence for ADHD; examine whether estimates have increased with publication of different editions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM); and explore the effect of study features on prevalence. METHODS: Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for studies with point prevalence estimates of ADHD. We included studies of children that used the diagnostic criteria from DSM-III, DSM-III-R and DSM-IV in any language. Data were extracted on sampling procedure, sample characteristics, assessors, measures, and whether full or partial criteria were met. RESULTS: The 175 eligible studies included 179 ADHD prevalence estimates with an overall pooled estimate of 7.2% (95% confidence interval: 6.7 to 7.8), and no statistically significant difference between DSM editions. In multivariable analyses, prevalence estimates for ADHD were lower when using the revised third edition of the DSM compared with the fourth edition (P =.03) and when studies were conducted in Europe compared with North America (P =.04). Few studies used population sampling with random selection. Most were from single towns or regions, thus limiting generalizability. CONCLUSIONS: Our review provides a benchmark prevalence estimate for ADHD. If population estimates of ADHD diagnoses exceed our estimate, then overdiagnosis may have occurred for some children. If fewer, then underdiagnosis may have occurred.

AB - BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Overdiagnosis and underdiagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are widely debated, fueled by variations in prevalence estimates across countries, time, and broadening diagnostic criteria. We conducted a meta-analysis to: establish a benchmark pooled prevalence for ADHD; examine whether estimates have increased with publication of different editions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM); and explore the effect of study features on prevalence. METHODS: Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for studies with point prevalence estimates of ADHD. We included studies of children that used the diagnostic criteria from DSM-III, DSM-III-R and DSM-IV in any language. Data were extracted on sampling procedure, sample characteristics, assessors, measures, and whether full or partial criteria were met. RESULTS: The 175 eligible studies included 179 ADHD prevalence estimates with an overall pooled estimate of 7.2% (95% confidence interval: 6.7 to 7.8), and no statistically significant difference between DSM editions. In multivariable analyses, prevalence estimates for ADHD were lower when using the revised third edition of the DSM compared with the fourth edition (P =.03) and when studies were conducted in Europe compared with North America (P =.04). Few studies used population sampling with random selection. Most were from single towns or regions, thus limiting generalizability. CONCLUSIONS: Our review provides a benchmark prevalence estimate for ADHD. If population estimates of ADHD diagnoses exceed our estimate, then overdiagnosis may have occurred for some children. If fewer, then underdiagnosis may have occurred.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84927710397&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1542/peds.2014-3482

DO - 10.1542/peds.2014-3482

M3 - Article

VL - 135

SP - e994-e1001

JO - Pediatrics

JF - Pediatrics

SN - 0031-4005

IS - 4

ER -