Researcher calls spike in ADHD diagnoses 'very significant'
A study of health records from California suggests that rates of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder have jumped by 24 percent since 2001.
“That is a very significant increase,” says Darios Getahun, a research scientist with the Kaiser Permanente Southern California Medical Group who conducted the study.
The apparent rise in diagnoses is likely caused by growing awareness of the condition among parents and doctors, he and other specialists said.
The study looked at health records of more than 840,000 children, ages 5 to 11, who met a strict definition for ADHD, as diagnosed by a trained expert. It found that 2.5 percent of children were diagnosed with ADHD at the start of the study in 2001, vs. 3.1 percent in 2010.
The percentage diagnosed is lower than in many other studies because of the strict diagnostic criteria and because, unlike other research, the study relied only on health records, not parents' reports, Getahun says.
The study, published in Monday's issue of JAMA Pediatrics, was large enough to break down those diagnosed by gender, race, family income and age. It found that boys were three times more likely to be diagnosed than girls. That may suggest that boys are more vulnerable to ADHD, as they are to autism, Getahun said.
It may be because girls with the condition are often overlooked, said pediatrician Craig Garfield of Northwestern University's Feinberg School of Medicine and Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Upstate New York town threatened by Arizona man in online post, reports say
- Hunt on for mother of baby buried alive in California
- Storm lingers in southern Plains
- New Navy destroyer Zumwalt’s seaworthiness questioned before sea trials
- Artists plan to rebuild Alaska art display damaged by tides
- Police officer killed in Colorado Spring clinic rampage a co-pastor, figure skater
- Hawaii confronts dengue fever cases
- Colorado clinic shooting suspect talked of baby parts, police say
- Police union stands by Chicago officer charged with murdering teen
- Chicago cop charged with murder in killing of black teen
- Nuclear crossroad: California reactors face uncertain future