Cited by 36Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderWorkplace Health and Well-beingDisability Education and Employment

A systematic review of interventions to support adults with ADHD at work—Implications from the paucity of context-specific research for theory and practice

Open access
Lauder, Kirsty, McDowall, Almuth, Tenenbaum, Harriet R.·2022·Frontiers in Psychology

Abstract

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is estimated to affect 3.5% of the global workforce. Despite the high prevalence rate, little is known about how best to support adults with ADHD (ADHDers) at work. Relevant research is dispersed across different disciplines such as medicine, health studies and psychology. Therefore, it is important to synthesize interventions aimed at ADHDers to examine what learning can be gleaned for effective workplace support. We conducted a systematic review of relevant interventions framed by realist evaluation and the Context-Intervention-Mechanism-Outcome classification to identify key mechanisms of effectiveness for workplace interventions. We searched 10 databases including a range of journals from medical science to business management applying predetermined inclusion criteria and quality appraisal through a risk of bias assessment for quantitative and qualitative methods. We synthesized 143 studies with realist evaluation. Most studies evaluated the effectiveness of pharmacological interventions highlighting the dominance of the medical approach to supporting ADHDers. Key mechanisms of effectiveness were identified from psychosocial interventions including group therapy, involvement of people in the ADHDers network, and the importance of the client-patient relationship. Overall, there is limited research that examines the effectiveness of workplace interventions for ADHDers. Furthermore, much of the existing research evaluates pharmacological interventions which is difficult to transfer to the workplace context. It is recommended that future research and practice consider the key mechanisms identified in this review when designing interventions as well as barriers to accessing support such as disclosure and self-awareness.

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 · 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.893469

Cites

96 of 96 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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?

  • ADHD symptoms such as impulsivity, procrastination, and difficulty meeting deadlines contribute to diminished productivity, increased job instability, and higher risk of unemployment in adults.

    “Symptoms such as impulsivity, procrastination, and difficulty meeting deadlines contribute to diminished productivity, increased job instability, and a higher risk of unemployment.”

    From ADHD in Adulthood: Clinical Presentation, Comorbidities, and Treatment Perspectives (2025) · cites this paper as [11]

    The Introduction identifies impulsivity as an ADHD symptom and says adults with ADHD are likely to report problems with work performance, job retention, and under- or unemployment. It does not specifically identify procrastination or missed deadlines as causes of those outcomes, and its wording is more cautious than the citing sentence’s causal claim. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Higgins J. Green S. (Eds.). (2011). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (5.1.0). The Cochrane Collaboration. Available online at: www.handbook.cochrane.org (accessed November 23, 2021).
  2. Institute of Medicine of the National Academies (2015). Committee on Developing Evidence-Based Standards for Psychosocial Interventions for Mental Disorders. 26203478
  3. National Institute for Health Care Excellence (2019). Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: Diagnosis and Management [NICE Guideline NG87]. Available online at: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng87 (accessed October 27, 2021). 29634174
  4. Pawson R. Tilley N. (1997). Realistic Evaluation. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lauder, K., McDowall, A., & Tenenbaum, H. R.
Affiliations
  • Birkbeck, University of London (GB)
  • University of Surrey (GB)
Corresponding author
Lauder, Kirsty
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Published
2022-08-22
Volume
13
Pages
893469-893469
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4292648133
Cited by
36
References
96
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 2
FWCI
1.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • BIROn (Birkbeck, University of London) (acceptedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Wellcome Trust
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, workplace support, workplace interventions, pharmacological interventions, psychosocial interventions, group therapy, peer support networks, barriers to support, realist evaluation

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