The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Issues in the definition and classification of attention deficit disorder
Abstract
This article examines the inextricably intertwined issues of definition and classification of attention deficit disorder (ADD), emphasizing the heterogeneity embedded within the diagnosis of ADD. Using data from our ongoing investigations we have focused on the overlap of ADD with reading disability as a heuristic example illustrating the consequences that heterogeneity has on a range of findings, including prevalence and the association between inattention and measures of language and reading. We propose and describe a systematic classification study whose goal is the development of a unitary, empirically derived classification for ADD, a classification that should increase the consistency and generalizability of findings across investigations and across disciplines.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“In the United-States, the highest prevalence estimate is given by Shaywitz, Fletcher and Shaywitz, (1994), who evaluated that 17.5% of students were dyslexic, according to a low-achievement criterion only (reading score inferior to -0.67 SD; N=445).”
From Epidemiology of reading disability: A comparison of DSM-5 and ICD-11 criteria (2022) · cites this paper as Shaywitz, Fletcher and Shaywitz, (1994)
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Filipek, P. A., Semrud-Clikeman, M., Steingard, R. J., Renshaw, P. F., Kennedy, D. N., & Biederman, J. (1997) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.48.3.589 · Cited by 732
The Education of Dyslexic Children from Childhood to Young Adulthood
Shaywitz, S. E., Morris, R., & Shaywitz, B. A. (2008) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093633 · Cited by 383
Self-citationMangeot, S., Armstrong, K., Colvin, A. N., Yeates, K. O., & Taylor, H. G. (2002) · Child Neuropsychology · doi:10.1076/chin.8.4.271.13503 · Cited by 257
Disruption of functional networks in dyslexia: a whole-brain, data-driven analysis of connectivity
Finn, E. S., Shen, X., Holahan, J. M., Scheinost, D., Lacadie, C., Papademetris, X., Shaywitz, S. E., Shaywitz, B. A., & Constable, R. T. (2014) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2013.08.031 · Cited by 248
Self-citationInstructional treatment associated with changes in brain activation in children with dyslexia
Aylward, E. H., Richards, T. L., Berninger, V. W., Nagy, W. E., Field, K. M., Grimme, A. C., Richards, A. L., Thomson, J. B., & Cramer, S. C. (2003) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000068363.05974.64 · Cited by 242
Metadata
- Authors
- Shaywitz, S. E., Fletcher, J. M., & Shaywitz, B. A.
- Affiliations
- Yale University (US)
- Venue
- Topics in Language Disorders
- Published
- 1994-08
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1-25
- ISSN
- 0271-8294 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2030412224
- Cited by
- 115
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 4.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Topics in Language Disorders (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Keywords
- attention deficit disorder, diagnostic classification, diagnostic heterogeneity, reading disorders, inattention, language measures, prevalence
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