27 research outputs found
Relationships between cognition and literacy in children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder:A systematic review and meta-analysis
Evidence suggests that cognitive and literacy difficulties are common for children with AttentionâDeficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). The current systematic review and metaâanalysis investigated the relationship between cognition and literacy in children with ADHD. Ten thousand and thirtyâeight articles were screened against the inclusion criteria and six eligible studies were retained for final review. Where two or more studies used comparable measures of cognition and literacy, a metaâanalysis of the relationship between these measures was undertaken. A narrative synthesis of all included studies was also completed. There were medium effect sizes between working memory and aspects of reading, and small effect sizes between processing speed and reading. Inhibition and attention had differential relationships with aspects of literacy with varying effect sizes. This systematic review demonstrates differential relationships between aspects of literacy and cognition in children with ADHD. Further examination of these relationships is warranted to support intervention development
The prevalence of Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder symptoms in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder without intellectual disability: a systematic review
Objective:
ADHD commonly co-occurs with ASD without ID in young people. It has been difficult to obtain accurate prevalence estimates of ADHD in this population, as a dual-diagnosis was not permitted until DSM-V. We systematically reviewed the literature on the prevalence of ADHD symptoms in young people with ASD without ID.
Method:
9,050 articles were identified through six databases. Articles were reviewed against inclusion and exclusion criteria and 23 studies were included.
Results:
ADHD symptom prevalence varied from 2.6% to 95.5%. We discuss these findings according to the ADHD assessment measure, informant, diagnostic criteria, risk of bias rating and recruitment pool.
Conclusion:
ADHD symptoms are common in young people with ASD without ID, but there is substantial variance in study reporting. Future studies should recruit participants from community sources, provide information on key sociodemographic sample characteristics and assess ADHD with standardized diagnostic criteria, using both parent/carer and teacher report
Recommended from our members
Lived experiences of depression in autistic children and adolescents: a qualitative study on child and parent perspectives
Depression is highly prevalent in autistic children and adolescents. Despite this, little is known about the nature of the autistic child's subjective experience of depression and the impact of depression on their lives. We therefore conducted a qualitative study using thematic analysis with 7 autistic children and adolescents and their parents to identify common themes and individual differences. All children had previously experienced at least one depressive episode. Six main themes were identified: (1) Autism related experiences; (2) Difficulties with peer relationships; (3) Co-occurring relationships between anxiety and depression; (4) Impactful pessimism and anhedonia; (5) Impactful difficulties with focus and concentration and (6) Feelings of irritability, including aggressive behaviours. Parent's accounts of their children's experience of depression mirrored the child's perspective. Novel findings included reports of depression related restriction of diet variety and masking of mental health difficulties. Children and parents linked being autistic and developing depression, referring to the difficulties of being autistic in a complex, neurotypical world. These results highlight key challenges that autistic children and their families experience, calling for increased awareness of the impact of depression on autistic young people
Anxiety, concerns and COVID-19: Cross-country perspectives from families and individuals with neurodevelopmental conditions
BACKGROUND:
The COVID-19 pandemic had a major impact on the mental health and well-being of children with neurodevelopmental conditions (NDCs) and of their families worldwide. However, there is insufficient evidence to understand how different factors (e.g., individual, family, country, children) have impacted on anxiety levels of families and their children with NDCs developed over time.
METHODS:
We used data from a global survey assessing the experience of 8043 families and their children with NDCs (mean of age (m)â=â13.18 years, 37% female) and their typically developing siblings (mâ=â12.9 years, 45% female) in combination with data from the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, the University of Oxford, and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) World Factbook, to create a multilevel data set. Using stepwise multilevel modelling, we generated child-, family- and country-related factors that may have contributed to the anxiety levels of children with NDCs, their siblings if they had any, and their parents. All data were reported by parents.
RESULTS:
Our results suggest that parental anxiety was best explained by family-related factors such as concerns about COVID-19 and illness. Childrenâs anxiety was best explained by child-related factors such as childrenâs concerns about loss of routine, family conflict, and safety in general, as well as concerns about COVID-19. In addition, anxiety levels were linked to the presence of pre-existing anxiety conditions for both children with NDCs and their parents.
CONCLUSIONS:
The present study shows that across the globe there was a raise in anxiety levels for both parents and their children with NDCs because of COVID-19 and that country-level factors had little or no impact on explaining differences in this increase, once family and child factors were considered. Our findings also highlight that certain groups of children with NDCs were at higher risk for anxiety than others and had specific concerns. Together, these results show that anxiety of families and their children with NDCs during the COVID-19 pandemic were predicted by very specific concerns and worries which inform the development of future toolkits and policy. Future studies should investigate how country factors can play a protective role during future crises
BHPR research: qualitative1.âComplex reasoning determines patients' perception of outcome following foot surgery in rheumatoid arhtritis
Background: Foot surgery is common in patients with RA but research into surgical outcomes is limited and conceptually flawed as current outcome measures lack face validity: to date no one has asked patients what is important to them. This study aimed to determine which factors are important to patients when evaluating the success of foot surgery in RA Methods: Semi structured interviews of RA patients who had undergone foot surgery were conducted and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis of interviews was conducted to explore issues that were important to patients. Results: 11 RA patients (9 â, mean age 59, dis dur = 22yrs, mean of 3 yrs post op) with mixed experiences of foot surgery were interviewed. Patients interpreted outcome in respect to a multitude of factors, frequently positive change in one aspect contrasted with negative opinions about another. Overall, four major themes emerged. Function: Functional ability & participation in valued activities were very important to patients. Walking ability was a key concern but patients interpreted levels of activity in light of other aspects of their disease, reflecting on change in functional ability more than overall level. Positive feelings of improved mobility were often moderated by negative self perception ("I mean, I still walk like a waddling duckâ). Appearance: Appearance was important to almost all patients but perhaps the most complex theme of all. Physical appearance, foot shape, and footwear were closely interlinked, yet patients saw these as distinct separate concepts. Patients need to legitimize these feelings was clear and they frequently entered into a defensive repertoire ("it's not cosmetic surgery; it's something that's more important than that, you know?â). Clinician opinion: Surgeons' post operative evaluation of the procedure was very influential. The impact of this appraisal continued to affect patients' lasting impression irrespective of how the outcome compared to their initial goals ("when he'd done it ... he said that hasn't worked as good as he'd wanted to ... but the pain has goneâ). Pain: Whilst pain was important to almost all patients, it appeared to be less important than the other themes. Pain was predominately raised when it influenced other themes, such as function; many still felt the need to legitimize their foot pain in order for health professionals to take it seriously ("in the end I went to my GP because it had happened a few times and I went to an orthopaedic surgeon who was quite dismissive of it, it was like what are you complaining aboutâ). Conclusions: Patients interpret the outcome of foot surgery using a multitude of interrelated factors, particularly functional ability, appearance and surgeons' appraisal of the procedure. While pain was often noted, this appeared less important than other factors in the overall outcome of the surgery. Future research into foot surgery should incorporate the complexity of how patients determine their outcome Disclosure statement: All authors have declared no conflicts of interes
Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19
IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19.
Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 nonâcritically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022).
INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (nâ=â257), ARB (nâ=â248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; nâ=â10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; nâ=â264) for up to 10 days.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ supportâfree days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes.
RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ supportâfree days among critically ill patients was 10 (â1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (nâ=â231), 8 (â1 to 17) in the ARB group (nâ=â217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (nâ=â231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ supportâfree days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes.
TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570