Cited by 33Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderSurvey Methodology and NonresponseAutism Spectrum Disorder Research

Revisiting ADHD age-of-onset in adults: to what extent should we rely on the recall of childhood symptoms?

Open access
Breda, V., Rohde, L. A., Menezes, A. M. B., Anselmi, L., Caye, A., Rovaris, D. L., Vitola, E. S., Bau, C. H. D. +1 more·2020·Psychological Medicine

Abstract

Background ADHD diagnosis requires the presence of symptoms before the age of twelve. In clinical assessment of adults, the most frequent strategy to check this criterion is investigating self-report recall of symptoms, despite little evidence on the validity of this approach. We aim to evaluate the recall accuracy and factors associated with its reliability in a large population-based sample of adults. Methods Individuals from the 1993 Pelotas Birth Cohort were followed-up from childhood to adulthood. At the age of 22, 3810 individuals were assessed through structured interviews by trained psychologists regarding mental health outcomes, including ADHD diagnosis and ADHD symptoms in childhood. The retrospective recall was compared with available information on ADHD childhood symptoms at the age of eleven. We also assessed factors related to recall accuracy through multiple regression analyses. Results Self-reported recall of childhood symptoms at 22 years of age had an accuracy of only 55.4%, with sensitivity of 32.8% and positive predictive value of 40.7%. Current inattention symptoms were associated with lower risk and social phobia with higher risk for false-positive endorsement, while higher levels of schooling correlated with lower risk and male gender with higher risk for false-negative endorsement. Conclusions Clinicians treating male patients with social phobia and ADHD symptoms should assess even more carefully retrospective recall of ADHD childhood symptoms. Moreove…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s003329171900076x

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Breda, V., Rohde, L. A., Menezes, A. M. B., Anselmi, L., Caye, A., Rovaris, D. L., Vitola, E. S., Bau, C. H. D., & Grevet, E. H.
Affiliations
  • Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (BR)
  • Universidade Federal de Pelotas (BR)
Corresponding author
Grevet, E. H.
Venue
Psychological Medicine
Published
2019-04-10
Volume
50
Issue
5
Pages
857-866
ISSN
  • 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8978
OpenAlex
W2939636704
Cited by
33
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 1
FWCI
3.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychological Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lume (Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
Funders
Wellcome Trust (086974/Z/08/Z)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
Keywords
adult ADHD, age of onset, retrospective recall, diagnostic validity, inattentive symptoms, social anxiety disorder, educational attainment, gender differences, neurodevelopmental trajectories, Pelotas birth cohort
MeSH terms
Adult, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Brazil, Female, Humans, Male, Mental Recall, Regression Analysis, Retrospective Studies, Reproducibility of Results, Age of Onset, Young Adult, Self Report

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