Discriminant Validity of Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Open accessAbstract
Objective The primary purpose of this study was to assess the discriminant validity of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) relative to well-defined groups of children with other psychiatric disorders. Method Clinic-referred patients diagnosed as having ADHD without any other comorbid diagnosis (N = 13), were compared with patients with only anxiety disorders (N = 20), disruptive disorders other than ADHD (N = 15), and nonreferred controls (N = 18) on measures of cognitive and academic functioning, as well as on objective measures of attention, impulse control, and activity level. Results All three patient groups were found to have cognitive and academic achievement difficulties relative to controls. However, the ADHD group was found to be inattentive and impulsive relative to the other patient groups and the nonreferred controls. Objective measurement of activity level distinguished the ADHD group from controls but not from the other two patient groups. Conclusions These data support the diagnostic validity of a small subgroup of ADHD children (i.e., those without comorbid diagnoses) and demonstrates, that as a group, these children can be distinguished from patients with anxiety as well as other disruptive disorders on objective test measures.
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?
Parent and teacher ratings are favored because they are inexpensive and are argued to have better ecological validity than objective mechanical measures like actigraphs.
“The preference for and popularity of using parent/teacher ratings to assess hyperactivity reflects the economic utility of obtaining, administering, and scoring the instruments, and their oft argued superior ecological validity relative to objective mechanical measures such as actigraphs (Barkley, 1991; Dane, Schachar, & Tannock, 2000; Halperin et al., 1993).”
From Ecological Validity of Clinic-Based Actigraphy for Assessing Hyperactivity in Clinically Evaluated Children with and without ADHD (2025) · cites this paper as Halperin et al., 1993
The Measures section describes using parent and teacher ratings alongside an actigraph, but does not explain why ratings might be preferred. A search of our copy for cost, ease of administration, and ecological validity found no passage comparing ratings with actigraphs on those grounds. (LLM, conf=0.74)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
A continuous performance test of brain damage
Rosvold, H. E., Mirsky, A. F., Sarason, I., Bransome, E. D., & Beck, L. H. (1956) · Journal of Consulting Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0043220 · Cited by 2,261 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Achenbach, T. M. & Edelbrock, C. (198 3), Manual for the Child Behavior Checklist and Revised Child Behavior Profil e. Burlington: University of Vermo nt. American Psychi atric Association ( 1987), Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 3rd edition. Revised. (DSM-lIl-R). Washington, DC: America n Psychiatric Association.
- Halperin, J. M., Sharma , V., Greenblatt, E. & Schwartz, S. T. ( 1991a), Assessme nt of the co ntinuo us performance test: reliability and va- lidity in a non referred sam ple. Psychological Assessm ent: A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 3:603-608 .
- Wer ry, J. S., Reeves, J. C. & Elkind, G. S. (1987b), Attention deficit, conduc t, oppositional and anxiety disorders in children: I. a review of research on differentiating charac teristics. J. Am. Acad. Cnild Adoles c. Psychiatry 26:133-1 43 .
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Frazier, T. W., Youngstrom, E. A., Glutting, J. J., & Watkins, M. W. (2007) · Journal of Learning Disabilities · doi:10.1177/00222194070400010401 · Cited by 700 · see citing works
Halperin, J. M., & Schulz, K. P. (2006) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.132.4.560 · Cited by 446 · see citing works
Self-citationRapport, M. D., Bolden, J., Kofler, M. J., Sarver, D. E., Raiker, J. S., & Alderson, R. M. (2009) · Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology · doi:10.1007/s10802-008-9287-8 · Cited by 265 · see citing works
Objective measurement of hyperactivity and attentional problems in ADHD
TEICHER, M. H., ITO, Y., GLOD, C. A., & BARBER, N. I. (1996) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/00004583-199603000-00015 · Cited by 243 · see citing works
Halperin, J. M., & Healey, D. M. (2011) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.07.006 · Cited by 237 · see citing works
Self-citationSeligman, L. D., Ollendick, T. H., Langley, A. K., & Baldacci, H. B. (2004) · Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15374424jccp3303_13 · Cited by 220 · see citing works
Attention deficit and impulsivity: Selecting, shifting, and stopping
Kenemans, J. L., Bekker, E. M., Lijffijt, M., Overtoom, C. C. E., Jonkman, L. M., & Verbaten, M. N. (2005) · International Journal of Psychophysiology · doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2005.03.009 · Cited by 122 · see citing works
Guanfacine potentiates the activation of prefrontal cortex evoked by warning signals
Clerkin, S. M., Schulz, K. P., Halperin, J. M., Newcorn, J. H., Ivanov, I., Tang, C. Y., & Fan, J. (2009) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2009.04.013 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Self-citationKofler, M. J., Soto, E. F., Rapport, M. D., & Whitehead, S. (2025) · Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment · doi:10.1007/s10862-025-10218-8 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
- Authors
- HALPERIN, J. M., NEWCORN, J. H., MATIER, K., SHARMA, V., McKAY, K. E., & SCHWARTZ, S.
- Affiliations
- Queens College, CUNY (US)
- Corresponding author
- HALPERIN, JEFFREY M.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1993-09
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1038-1043
- ISSN
- 0890-8567 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1971599481
- Cited by
- 81
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 3.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- NIMH (MH46448)
- PSC-CUNY (661286)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
- Keywords
- attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, discriminant validity, diagnostic validity, psychiatric comorbidity, anxiety disorders, disruptive behavior disorders, inattention, impulsivity, activity level, cognitive function, academic performance
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Child, Female, Humans, Male, Personality Assessment, Psychometrics, Discriminant Analysis
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
