Cited by 335Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderWorkplace Health and Well-beingDisability Education and Employment

The Prevalence and Effects of Adult Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder on Work Performance in a Nationally Representative Sample of Workers

Kessler, Ronald C., Adler, Lenard, Ames, Minnie, Barkley, Russell A., Birnbaum, Howard, Greenberg, Paul, Johnston, Joseph A., Spencer, Thomas +1 more·2005·Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The prevalence and workplace consequences of adult attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are unknown. METHODS: An ADHD screen was included in a national household survey (n = 3198, ages 18-44). Clinical re-interviews calibrated the screen to diagnoses of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition ADHD. Diagnoses among workers were compared with responses to the WHO Health and Work Performance Questionnaire (HPQ). RESULTS: A total of 4.2% of workers had ADHD. ADHD was associated with 35.0 days of annual lost work performance, with higher associations among blue collar (55.8 days) than professional (12.2 days), technical (19.8 days), or service (32.6 days) workers. These associations represent 120 million days of annual lost work in the U.S. labor force, equivalent to dollar 19.5 billion lost human capital. CONCLUSIONS: ADHD is a common and costly workplace condition. Effectiveness trials are needed to estimate the region of interest of workplace ADHD screening and treatment programs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/01.jom.0000166863.33541.39

Cites

45 of 45 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kessler, R. C., Adler, L., Ames, M., Barkley, R. A., Birnbaum, H., Greenberg, P., Johnston, J. A., Spencer, T., & ??st??n, T. B.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Kessler, Ronald C.
Venue
Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine
Published
2005-06
Volume
47
Issue
6
Pages
565-572
ISSN
1076-2752 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2154077719
Cited by
335
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 33
FWCI
11.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Eli Lilly and Company
  • National Institutes of Health (5r13mh066849-04, 5r01mh069864-04, 5r01mh070884-05)
  • Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R13-MH-066849, R01‐MH070884, U01MH060220, R01‐MH069864)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA016558)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Education and Employment
Keywords
adult ADHD, ADHD prevalence, employee performance, productivity loss, occupational health, blue-collar workers, human capital loss, workplace screening
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Efficiency, Employee Performance Appraisal, Female, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Male, Surveys and Questionnaires, United States, Prevalence, Workplace

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