Institute for the Developing Mind, Children's Hospital Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.
Department of Psychiatry, Keck School of Medicine at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California.
Pediatrics. 2024 Apr 1;153(4). doi: 10.1542/peds.2024-065854.
Correct diagnosis is essential for the appropriate clinical management of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents.
This systematic review provides an overview of the available diagnostic tools.
We identified diagnostic accuracy studies in 12 databases published from 1980 through June 2023.
Any ADHD tool evaluation for the diagnosis of ADHD, requiring a reference standard of a clinical diagnosis by a mental health specialist.
Data were abstracted and critically appraised by 1 reviewer and checked by a methodologist. Strength of evidence and applicability assessments followed Evidence-based Practice Center standards.
In total, 231 studies met eligibility criteria. Studies evaluated parental ratings, teacher ratings, youth self-reports, clinician tools, neuropsychological tests, biospecimen, EEG, and neuroimaging. Multiple tools showed promising diagnostic performance, but estimates varied considerably across studies, with a generally low strength of evidence. Performance depended on whether ADHD youth were being differentiated from neurotypically developing children or from clinically referred children.
Studies used different components of available tools and did not report sufficient data for meta-analytic models.
A valid and reliable diagnosis of ADHD requires the judgment of a clinician who is experienced in the evaluation of youth with and without ADHD, along with the aid of standardized rating scales and input from multiple informants across multiple settings, including parents, teachers, and youth themselves.
正确的诊断对于儿童和青少年注意力缺陷/多动障碍(ADHD)的适当临床管理至关重要。
本系统评价提供了现有诊断工具的概述。
我们在 1980 年至 2023 年 6 月期间从 12 个数据库中确定了诊断准确性研究。
任何用于诊断 ADHD 的 ADHD 工具评估,需要通过心理健康专家的临床诊断作为参考标准。
由 1 名审阅者提取和批判性评估数据,并由方法学家进行检查。证据强度和适用性评估遵循循证实践中心标准。
共有 231 项研究符合入选标准。研究评估了父母评分、教师评分、青少年自我报告、临床医生工具、神经心理学测试、生物样本、脑电图和神经影像学。多种工具显示出有希望的诊断性能,但估计在研究之间差异很大,证据强度普遍较低。性能取决于 ADHD 青少年是否与神经典型发育的儿童或临床转介的儿童区分开来。
研究使用了可用工具的不同组成部分,并且没有报告足够的数据进行荟萃分析模型。
ADHD 的有效和可靠诊断需要有经验的临床医生进行评估,他们熟悉评估有无 ADHD 的青少年,同时还需要借助标准化的评分量表,并从多个环境中的多个信息源(包括父母、教师和青少年自己)获得输入。