Cited by 1,601Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchSchizophrenia research and treatment

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 68 of the 69 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prevalence and correlates of adult attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: meta-analysis

Open access

Abstract

Background: In spite of the growing literature about adult attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), relatively little is known about the prevalence and correlates of this disorder. Aims: To estimate the prevalence of adult ADHD and to identify its demographic correlates using meta-regression analysis. Method: We used the MEDLINE, PsycLit and EMBASE databases as well as hand-searching to find relevant publications. Results: The pooled prevalence of adult ADHD was 2.5% (95% CI 2.1–3.1). Gender and mean age, interacting with each other, were significantly related to prevalence of ADHD. Metaregression analysis indicated that the proportion of participants with ADHD decreased with age when men and women were equally represented in the sample. Conclusions: Prevalence of ADHD in adults declines with age in the general population. We think, however, that the unclear validity of DSM–IV diagnostic criteria for this condition can lead to reduced prevalence rates by underestimation of the prevalence of adult ADHD.

Overview

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1192/bjp.bp.107.048827

Cites

68 of 68 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 69 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Nisbett, 1977, Telling more than we know, Psychol Rev, 74
  2. 10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.65 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 1,601

Metadata

Authors
Simon, V., Czobor, P., Bálint, S., Mészáros, Á., & Bitter, I.
Affiliations
Semmelweis University (HU)
Corresponding author
Simon, Viktória
Venue
British Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2009-03
Volume
194
Issue
3
Pages
204-211
ISSN
  • 0007-1250 (ISSN-L)
  • 1472-1465
OpenAlex
W2117104588
Cited by
1,601
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 80 · 2025: 90 · 2024: 100 · 2023: 122 · 2022: 115 · 2021: 111 · 2020: 138 · 2019: 93 · 2018: 93 · 2017: 116 · 2016: 104 · 2015: 116 · 2014: 103 · 2013: 78 · 2012: 61
FWCI
5.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The British Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
Keywords
adult ADHD, ADHD prevalence, demographic correlates, age differences, gender differences, DSM-IV diagnostic criteria, underestimation of prevalence, general population
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Regression Analysis, Sex Factors, Prevalence, Young Adult

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