Cited by 439Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderBehavioral and Psychological StudiesAutism Spectrum Disorder Research

The Effects of School-Based Interventions for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: A Meta-Analysis 1996–2010

DuPaul, George J., Eckert, Tanya L., Vilardo, Brigid·2012·School Psychology Review

Abstract

.A meta-analysis evaluating the effects of school-based interventions for students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder was conducted by examining 60 outcome studies between 1996 and 2010 that yielded 85 effect sizes. Separate analyses were performed for studies employing between-subjects, within-subjects, and single-subject experimental designs. The overall mean effect sizes for dependent measures of behavior were positive and significant for within-subjects (0.72) and single-subject (2.20) designs, but not for between-subjects (0.18) designs. Mean effect sizes for academic outcomes were positive but not significant for between-subjects (0.43) and within-subjects (0.42) design studies, but were positive and significant for single-subject (3.48) design studies. Contingency management, academic intervention, and cognitive-behavioral intervention strategies were all associated with positive effects for academic and behavioral outcomes. Other moderators (e.g., school setting, publication status) are discussed along with implications for school-based management of students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and future treatment studies for this population.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/02796015.2012.12087496

Cites

154 of 154 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Many randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses have shown that current pharmacological and behavioral treatments yield short-term improvements in oppositional behavior, overt ADHD symptoms, and some peer, family, and academic functioning.

    “Numerous RCTs and meta-analytic reviews have documented the short-term benefits of extant pharmacological and behavioral interventions for improving oppositional behavior and overt ADHD behavioral symptoms, as well as some aspects of peer, family, and academic functioning”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
DuPaul, G. J., Eckert, T. L., & Vilardo, B.
Affiliations
  • Lehigh University (US)
  • Syracuse University (US)
Corresponding author
DuPaul, George J.
Venue
School Psychology Review
Published
2012-12-01
Volume
41
Issue
4
Pages
387-412
ISSN
  • 0279-6015 (ISSN-L)
  • 2372-966X
OpenAlex
W35345420
Cited by
439
References
154
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 27 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 20
FWCI
3.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
School Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
Keywords
attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, school-based intervention, behavioral effects, educational outcomes, contingency management, academic intervention, cognitive-behavioral intervention, single-case experimental design, within-subjects design, between-subjects design, school-based management

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