scholarly journals The factor structure of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in schoolchildren

Author(s):  
Trine Wigh Arildskov ◽  
Anne Virring ◽  
Rikke Lambek ◽  
Anders Helles Carlsen ◽  
Edmund J.S. Sonuga-Barke ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTThis study investigated the factor structure of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) by comparing the fit of a single-factor model, a correlated model with two or three factors, and a bifactor model with one general and two or three specific factors. Different three-factor solutions that varied with regard to the specification of the item “talks excessively” as impulsivity or hyperactivity were also tested. Parent ratings on the ADHD-Rating Scale (ADHD-RS-IV) were collected in a sample of 2044 schoolchildren (1st to 3rd grade) from the general population and in a clinical sample of 165 children and adolescents with ADHD referred to a public regional child and adolescent psychiatric hospital. Confirmatory factor analyses found a satisfactory fit for most models in both samples. However, a correlated three-factor model where “talks excessively” was included as an indicator of impulsivity and especially the bifactor version of this model with one general and three specific factors fit the data slightly better in the general population. In the clinical sample, a number of models performed equally well (the same version of the correlated three-factor model and all the bifactor models). Overall, the factor structure of ADHD seems to be better characterized by a bifactor model with a strong general factor and two or three weaker specific factors. Due to the strong general factor, we suggest emphasizing the ADHD-RS-IV total score rather than the subscale scores in clinical practice.

Assessment ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (7) ◽  
pp. 885-897 ◽  
Author(s):  
Víctor B. Arias ◽  
Fernando P. Ponce ◽  
Daniel. E. Núñez

Background: In the past decade, the bifactor model of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has been extensively researched. This model consists of an ADHD general dimension and two specific factors: inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity. All studies conclude that the bifactor is superior to the traditional two-correlated factors model, according to the fit obtained by factor analysis. However, the proper interpretation of a bifactor not only depends on the fit but also on the quality of the measurement model. Objective: To evaluate the model-based reliability, distribution of common variance and construct replicability of general and specific ADHD factors. Method: We estimated expected common variance, omega hierarchical/subscale and H-index from standardized factor loadings of 31 ADHD bifactor models previously published. Results and Conclusion: The ADHD general factor explained most of the common variance. Given the low reliable variance ratios, the specific factors were difficult to interpret. However, in clinical samples, inattention acquired sufficient specificity and stability for interpretation beyond the general factor. Implications for research and clinical practice are discussed.


Psico-USF ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 259-272 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monalisa Muniz ◽  
Cristiano Mauro Assis Gomes ◽  
Sonia Regina Pasian

Abstract This study's objective was to verify the factor structure of Raven's Coloured Progressive Matrices (CPM). The database used included the responses of 1,279 children, 50.2% of which were males with an average age of 8.48 years old and a standard deviation of 1.49 yrs. Confirmatory factor analyses were run to test seven models based on CPM theory and on a Brazilian study addressing the test's structure. The results did not confirm the CPM theoretical proposition concerning the scales but indicated that the test can be interpreted by one general factor and one specific factor or one general factor and three specific factors; both are bi-dimensional models. The three-factor model is, however, more interpretable, suggesting that the factors can be used as a means of screening children's cognitive developmental stage.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
Alyson R. Pierick ◽  
Melodie Lynn ◽  
Courtney M. McCracken ◽  
Matthew E. Oster ◽  
Glen J. Iannucci

Abstract Introduction: The prevalence of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder in the general population is common and is now diagnosed in 4%–12% of children. Children with CHD have been shown to be at increased risk for attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Case reports have led to concern regarding the use of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder medications in children with underlying CHD. We hypothesised that medical therapy for patients with CHD and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder is safe. Methods: A single-centre, retrospective chart review was performed evaluating for adverse events in patients aged 4–21 years with CHD who received attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder therapy over a 5-year span. Inclusion criteria were a diagnosis of CHD and concomitant medical therapy with amphetamines, methylphenidate, or atomoxetine. Patients with trivial or spontaneously resolved CHD were excluded from analysis. Results: In 831 patients with CHD who received stimulants with a mean age of 12.9 years, there was only one adverse cardiovascular event identified. Using sensitivity analysis, our median follow-up time was 686 days and a prevalence rate of 0.21% of adverse events. This episode consisted of increased frequency of supraventricular tachycardia in a patient who had this condition prior to initiation of medical therapy; the condition improved with discontinuation of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder therapy. Conclusion: The incidence of significant adverse cardiovascular events in our population was similar to the prevalence of supraventricular tachycardia in the general population. Our single-centre experience demonstrated no increased risk in adverse events related to medical therapy for children with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder and underlying CHD. Further population-based studies are indicated to validate these findings.


2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 264-268
Author(s):  
Narmada Devkota ◽  
Shishir Subba ◽  
Janardan Devkota ◽  
Jaya Regmee ◽  
Deepika Pokhrel

Background: There is no valid Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder diagnostic tool to fit Nepalese culture and language till date. Current study is intended to develop and validate the Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder scale for children in Nepal.Methods: Mixed method study was conducted with 840 samples (i.e. children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder =356, Anxiety =128 and General Population=356).Items generation, scale development and scale evaluation were the three consecutive steps followed to develop and validate the scale.Children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (already met the Diagnostic and statistical Manual-5 criteria) were further assessed by Kiddie-Schedule for Affective disorders and Schizophrenia (K-SADS-PL), Child and Adolescent Symptoms Inventory (CASI-5) to confirm the diagnosis and psychometric validation. Pilot studies were done for items clarity. Each data obtained from three comparison groups (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder , Anxiety and General Population) were included for standardization process where tests of dimensionality, reliability, validity,calculating norms (cut off) were doneas scale evaluation process.Results: The final version of the scale had 21 items. Three sub-scales (Inattention, Impulsivity and Hyperactivity) were identified by using Principal Axis Factor Analysis.All factors showed strong statistically significant convergent validity and Discriminant validity Cronbach’s alpha of each item is ? 0.91.As total score criteria, 38.5 is considered as the best cut-off point for this scale.Conclusions: By using systematic process, a valid and reliable Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder diagnostic scale is being developed in Nepalese culture and language.Keywords: ADHD; development and validation; executive function.


2019 ◽  
Vol 95 (6) ◽  
pp. 736-743 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danielle S. Costa ◽  
Jonas Jardim de Paula ◽  
Leandro F. Malloy-Diniz ◽  
Marco A. Romano-Silva ◽  
Débora M. Miranda

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document