Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSawhney, I
dc.contributor.authorPerera, B
dc.contributor.authorBassett, P
dc.contributor.authorZia, A
dc.contributor.authorAlexander, RT
dc.contributor.authorShankar, R
dc.date.accessioned2021-10-04T12:53:36Z
dc.date.available2021-10-04T12:53:36Z
dc.date.issued2021-11
dc.identifier.issn2056-4724
dc.identifier.issn2056-4724
dc.identifier.othere187
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/17983
dc.description.abstract

<jats:sec id="S2056472421010231_sec_a1"> <jats:title>Background</jats:title> <jats:p>Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is common among people with intellectual disability. Diagnosing ADHD in this clinically and cognitively complex and diverse group is difficult, given the overlapping psychiatric and behavioural presentations. Underdiagnoses and misdiagnoses leading to irrational polypharmacy and worse health and social outcomes are common. Diagnostic interviews exist, but are cumbersome and not in regular clinical use.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec id="S2056472421010231_sec_a2"> <jats:title>Aims</jats:title> <jats:p>We aimed to develop a screening tool to help identify people with intellectual disability and ADHD.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec id="S2056472421010231_sec_a3" sec-type="methods"> <jats:title>Method</jats:title> <jats:p>A prospective cross-sectional study, using STROBE guidance, invited all carers of people with intellectual disability aged 18–50 years open to the review of the psychiatric team in a single UK intellectual disability service (catchment population: 150 000). A ten-item questionnaire based on the DSM-V ADHD criteria was circulated. All respondents’ baseline clinical characteristics were recorded, and the DIVA-5-ID was administered blinded to the individual questionnaire result. Fisher exact and multiple logistic regressions were conducted to identify relevant questionnaire items and the combinations that afforded best sensitivity and specificity for predicting ADHD.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec id="S2056472421010231_sec_a4" sec-type="results"> <jats:title>Results</jats:title> <jats:p>Of 78 people invited, 39 responded (26 men, 13 women), of whom 30 had moderate-to-profound intellectual disability and 38 had associated comorbidities and on were medication, including 22 on psychotropics. Thirty-six screened positive for ADHD, and 24 were diagnosed (16 men, eight women). Analysis showed two positive responses on three specific questions to have 88% sensitivity and 87% specificity, and be the best predictor of ADHD.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec id="S2056472421010231_sec_a5" sec-type="conclusions"> <jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title> <jats:p>The three-question screening is an important development for identifying ADHD in people with intellectual disability. It needs larger-scale replication to generate generalisable results.</jats:p> </jats:sec>

dc.format.extente187-
dc.format.mediumElectronic
dc.languageen
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherRoyal College of Psychiatrists
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.subjectAttention-deficit hyperactivity disorders
dc.subjectcomorbidity
dc.subjectdevelopmental disorders
dc.subjectintellectual disability
dc.subjectstatistical methodology
dc.titleAttention-deficit hyperactivity disorder in people with intellectual disability: statistical approach to developing a bespoke screening tool
dc.typejournal-article
dc.typeArticle
plymouth.author-urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34602112
plymouth.issue6
plymouth.volume7
plymouth.publication-statusPublished
plymouth.journalBJPsych Open
dc.identifier.doi10.1192/bjo.2021.1023
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
dc.publisher.placeEngland
dc.identifier.eissn2056-4724
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot known
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1192/bjo.2021.1023
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International

All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV