Skip to main content

Danilo Díaz Granados read: New Findings Could Help Explain Why ADHD Is Often Overlooked in Girls

GettyImages-903669856.jpgBy Emma Young

For every girl with ADHD, there are three boys with the same diagnosis. But among adults, the gender ratio is more like 1:1. That’s a big discrepancy. So what’s going on? 

In 2017, Aja Louise Murray at the University of Cambridge and colleagues investigated possible predictors of childhood vs. later (adolescent/adult-onset) ADHD, and they found hints that girls tend to develop ADHD at a later age than boys. Now a team that includes the same researchers has investigated this explicitly and in their paper in Developmental Science, they’ve confirmed it seems to be the case, which could partially explain the discrepancy in the ADHD gender ratio between children and adults. 

The researchers analysed data on 1,571 children living in Zurich, Switzerland, whose teachers used a standard scale to assess symptoms of inattention and also of hyperactivity/impulsivity every year from age 7 (when the children started school) through to age 15. The two domains of ADHD were assessed separately, as previous work has found that they can develop at different rates.

When it came to inattention, most of the children (about 60 per cent of boys and girls) had low levels of symptoms between the ages 7 to 15. However, whereas the remaining 40 per cent of the boys had persistently high inattention levels during this period, among the girls there was more variation, and generally lower symptom levels: almost a third had moderate symptoms that declined with increasing age, while the others started out with relatively serious symptoms at age 7, which then declined, but still remained above average at age 15. 

For hyperactivity/impulsivity, there were also some contrasting developmental profiles between the sexes. Again, the majority of children (81 per cent of the girls and 61 per cent of the boys) started out with low levels of symptoms, which decreased even further into late adolescence. There was also a group (13 per cent of boys and 10 percent of girls), who had mildly elevated symptoms in childhood, followed by a dip around age 11 to 13, but then a rapid increase. “This group could speculatively be characterised as ‘adolescence-triggered’,” the researchers write. Finally, there was also a group of children (24 per cent of boys, versus only 9 per cent of girls) who had high levels of symptoms all the way through the study period. 

In other words, according to this data, more boys than girls show consistently high levels of hyperactivity/impulsivity – and inattention – symptoms from a young age, whereas proportionately more girls than boys develop high levels of these symptoms (which may lead to a diagnosis of ADHD) only after early adolescence.

Whatever the reasons for this difference, it could be relevant to the sex difference in diagnosis rates because current ADHD diagnostic criteria for children require symptoms to have begun before the age of 12. This could mean that a greater proportion of girls with ADHD, than boys, are being missed by clinicians. (Exactly why adolescence might be associated with a sudden rise in these symptoms in some children, and especially girls, is not known – it could be to do with hormones, and/or increased social and academic pressures, the researchers note.) 

“More attention should be paid to early adolescence as a period of risk for hyperactivity/impulsivity symptom onset or worsening,” Murray and her colleagues write.  And, they add: “It should be investigated whether removing the ‘onset before 12’ stipulation in diagnostic tests would help to identify more girls who would benefit from intervention.” 

—Sex differences in ADHD trajectories across childhood and adolescence

Emma Young (@EmmaELYoung) is Staff Writer at BPS Research Digest



View Source

Popular posts from this blog

Danilo Díaz Granados read: Beyond the invisible gorilla – inattention can also render us numb and anosmic (without smell)

By Emma Young It’s well-known that we can miss apparently obvious objects in our visual field if other events are hogging our limited attention. The same has been shown for sounds: in a nod to Daniel Simons’ and Christopher Chabris’ famous gorilla/basketball study that demonstrated “inattentional blindness”, distracted participants in the first “inattentional deafness” study failed to hear a man walking through an auditory scene for 19 seconds saying repeatedly “I am a gorilla”. Now, two new studies separately show that a very similar effect occurs in relation to touch ( inattentional numbness ) and to smell   ( inattentional anosmia ).   Sandra Murphy and Polly Dalton (a co-author on the inattentional deafness paper) at Royal Holloway, University of London report in the journal Cognition on inattentional numbness. They wanted to go beyond the way we rapidly tune out ongoing tactile stimulation, like the sensation of our clothes, and explore what happens when we’re tou...
Read more

Danilo Díaz Granados read: “Skunk” Cannabis Disrupts Brain Networks – But Effects Are Blocked In Other Strains

By Matthew Warren Over the past decade, neuroimaging studies have provided new insights into how psychoactive drugs alter the brain’s activity. Psilocybin – the active ingredient in magic mushrooms – has been found to reduce activity in brain regions involved in depression , for example, while MDMA seems to augment brain activity for positive memories . Now a new study sheds some light into what’s going in the brain when people smoke cannabis – and it turns out that the effects can be quite different depending on the specific strain of the drug. The research, published recently in the Journal of Psychopharmacology , suggests that cannabis disrupts particular brain networks  – but some strains can buffer against this disruption. Cannabis contains two major active ingredients: tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD). THC is responsible for many of the drug’s psychoactive effects, such as the feeling of being stoned and the anxiety that people sometimes feel, as well as ...
Read more

Danilo Díaz Granados read: Many social psychologists are impeded by their ideological aversion to evolutionary psychology

By Christian Jarrett A new survey of beliefs held by social psychologists (335 members of the Society of Experimental Social Psychologists) has confirmed previous reports that the field is overwhelmingly populated by researchers of a left-wing, liberal bent. What’s more, David Buss and William von Hippel – the evolutionary psychologists who conducted and analysed the survey – say their findings, published open-access in Archives of Scientific Psychology , suggest that many of these social psychologists are opposed, for ideological reasons, to insights rooted in evolutionary psychology and that this is impeding them from developing a “proper science of social psychology”. Buss and von Hippel add that compounding matters is an irony – the social psychologists’ desire to signal their ideological stance and commitment to others who share their political views, which is a manifestation of the evolved human adaptation to form coalitions. “Part of this virtue signalling entails rejecting a...
Read more