Clinical effects of an ACT-group training in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder
Open accessAbstract
Abstract Objective The aim of the present study is evaluate the effectiveness of an Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT)-based training protocol, in adjunct to token economy and previous parent training, in a sample of children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). By promoting the reduction of immediate responses to thoughts and feelings, we aimed to reduce the impulsive behaviour of children and to improve their self-regulation. Methods The protocol was centred on awareness of the present moment, defusion and acceptance of feelings and emotions. Behavioural (Conners’ Parent Rating Scale -Revised: Long version, CPRS-R:L) and severity measures (Clinical Global Impression -Severity, CGI-S) were assessed before and after treatment in a clinical sample of 31 children aged 8–13 years. Results At the end of the ACT protocol, children showed significant improvement in global functioning and behavioural symptoms. There were significant improvements in the CPRS subscales Cognitive Problems (p = 0.005), Hyperactivity (p = 0.006), Perfectionism (p = 0.017), ADHD Index (p = 0.023), Global Index: Restless–Impulsive (p = 0.023), Global Index: Total (p = 0.036), DSM IV Inattentive (p = 0.029), DSM IV Hyperactive–Impulsive (p = 0.016), and DSM IV Total (p = 0.003). When controlling for the confounding effect of pharmacological therapy, comorbidities and socio-economic status, treatment maintained a significant effect on the CPRS subscales Perfectionism (partial η2 = 0.31, p < 0.01), Global Index: Restless–Impulsive (partial η2 = 0.29, p < 0.01), Global Index: Total (partial η2 = 0.31, p < 0.01), DSM IV Hyperactive–Impulsive (partial η2 = 0.20, p = 0.02). Symptom severity as rated by CGI-S scores decreased in 74.2% of the children. Conclusions This preliminary work on an Acceptance and Commitment Therapy-based child training in children affected by ADHD resulted in significant improvements, measured by a rating scale specific for ADHD.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Vanzin et al. (2019) found statistically significant improvements across all CPRS-R:L and CGI-S, maintained after controlling confounders, and substantial reduction in symptom severity.
“The findings demonstrated statistically significant results across all the CPRS-R:L (Conners, 1997) and the CGI-S (Busner and Targum, 2007).”
From Acceptance and commitment therapy for individuals having attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): A scoping review (2021) · cites this paper as Vanzin et al., 2019
The Results report a significant CGI-S improvement (p < 0.001) and improvement in 74.2% of patients. But Table 3 shows that several CPRS-R:L subscales did not improve significantly, and the Results say that only four subscales remained significant after controlling for covariates. Thus, the claim overstates the findings by saying the results were significant across all CPRS-R:L subscales and remained so after adjustment. (LLM, conf=0.92)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe findings of the remaining studies (Murrell et al., 2015; Vanzin et al., 2019, 2020) still point towards the same conclusion regarding effectiveness of using ACT among individuals with ADHD.
“Nevertheless, the findings of remaining studies (Murrell et al., 2015; Vanzin et al., 2019, 2020) still point towards the same conclusion regarding effectiveness of using ACT among individuals with ADHD.”
From Acceptance and commitment therapy for individuals having attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): A scoping review (2021) · cites this paper as Vanzin et al., 2019
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 64 · Cited by 21
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Wechsler, D. (1991). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Third Edition. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
- Authors
- Vanzin, L., Mauri, V., Valli, A., Pozzi, M., Presti, G., Oppo, A., Ristallo, A., Molteni, M., & Nobile, M.
- Affiliations
- IRCCS Eugenio Medea (IT)
- Università degli Studi di Enna Kore (IT)
- Sigmund Freud Privatuniversität - Standort Mailand (IT)
- Corresponding author
- Pozzi, Marco
- ORCID
- Venue
- Journal of Child and Family Studies
- Published
- 2019-09-11
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1070-1080
- ISSN
- 1062-1024 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-2843
- OpenAlex
- W2972401241
- Cited by
- 21
- References
- 64
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 1
- FWCI
- 1.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Child and Family Studies (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- INFM-OAR (INFN Catania) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Ministero della Salute
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
- Keywords
- attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, acceptance and commitment therapy, children and adolescents, token economy, parent training, impulsivity, self-regulation, defusion, acceptance of emotions, perfectionism, hyperactivity, inattention
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review