Cited by 75Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderDevelopmental and Educational NeuropsychologyAutism Spectrum Disorder Research

ADHD and the QbTest: Diagnostic Validity of QbTest

Open access
Hult, Nicklas, Kadesjö, Josefin, Kadesjö, Björn, Gillberg, Christopher, Billstedt, Eva·2018·Journal of Attention Disorders

Abstract

Objective: We assess the diagnostic accuracy of the QbTest, which measures the cardinal symptoms of ADHD. Method: The study group comprised 182 children (mean age about 10 years), of whom 124 had ADHD and 58 had other clinical diagnosis of which 81% had ASD. Results: Only QbTest parameters for inattention and hyperactivity differentiated between ADHD and other clinical diagnoses at the p ≤ .01 level, not for measures of impulsivity. Sensitivity ranged from 47% to 67% and specificity from 72% to 84%. Positive predictive value ranged from 41% to 86%, and negative predictive value from 43% to 86%. Area under the curve varied from .70 to .80. Conclusion: The ability of the individual QbTest parameters to identify ADHD was moderate. The test’s ability to discriminate between ADHD subtypes was unsatisfactory.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1087054715595697

Cites

19 of 19 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?

  • Hult et al. observed moderate sensitivity (47-67%) and specificity (72-84%) for the QbTest 6-12 in a clinical sample.

    “Hult et al. [33] examined the diagnostic validity of the QbTest 6–12 applying ROC curves in a clinical sample of children diagnosed with ADHD and a clinical control group of individuals with primarily autism spectrum disorder, observing moderate sensitivity (47–67%) and specificity values (72–84%).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hult, N., Kadesjö, J., Kadesjö, B., Gillberg, C., & Billstedt, E.
Affiliations
University of Gothenburg (SE)
Corresponding author
Hult, Nicklas
Venue
Journal of Attention Disorders
Published
2015-07-29
Volume
22
Issue
11
Pages
1074-1080
ISSN
  • 1087-0547 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-1246
OpenAlex
W2272057312
Cited by
75
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3
FWCI
2.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Attention Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
Keywords
attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, diagnostic validity, diagnostic accuracy, inattention, hyperactivity, impulsivity, autism spectrum disorder, children, sensitivity and specificity, ADHD subtypes
MeSH terms
Behavior Rating Scale, Adolescent, Attention, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Child, Female, Humans, Impulsive Behavior, Male, Psychological Tests, Sensitivity and Specificity

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