Association between relative age at school and persistence of ADHD in prospective studies: an individual participant data meta-analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background The youngest children in a school class are more likely than the oldest to be diagnosed with ADHD, but this relative age effect is less frequent in older than in younger school-grade children. However, no study has explored the association between relative age and the persistence of ADHD diagnosis at older ages. We aimed to quantify the association between relative age and persistence of ADHD at older ages. Methods For this meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and PubPsych up to April 1, 2022, with terms related to "cohort" and "ADHD" with no date, publication type, or language restrictions. We gathered individual participant data from prospective cohorts that included at least ten children identified with ADHD before age 10 years. ADHD was defined by either a clinical diagnosis or symptoms exceeding clinical cutoffs. Relative age was recorded as the month of birth in relation to the school-entry cutoff date. Study authors were invited to share raw data or to apply a script to analyse data locally and generate anonymised results. Our outcome was ADHD status at a diagnostic reassessment, conducted at least 4 years after the initial assessment and after age 10 years. No information on sex, gender, or ethnicity was collected. We did a two-stage random-effects individual participant data meta-analysis to assess the association of relative age with persistence of ADHD at follow-up. This study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020212650. Findings Of 33 119 studies generated by our search, we identified 130 eligible unique studies and were able to gather individual participant data from 57 prospective studies following up 6504 children with ADHD. After exclusion of 16 studies in regions with a flexible school entry system that did not allow confident linkage of birthdate to relative age, the primary analysis included 41 studies in 15 countries following up 4708 children for a period of 4 to 33 years. We found that younger relative age was not statistically significantly associated with ADHD persistence at follow-up (odds ratio 1·02, 95% CI 0·99–1·06; p=0·19). We observed statistically significant heterogeneity in our model (Q=75·82, p=0·0011, I 2 =45%). Participant-level sensitivity analyses showed similar results in cohorts with a robust relative age effect at baseline and when restricting to cohorts involving children with a clinical diagnosis of ADHD or with a follow-up duration of more than 10 years. Interpretation The diagnosis of ADHD in younger children in a class is no more likely to be disconfirmed over time than that of older children in the class. One interpretation is that the relative age effect decreases the likelihood of children of older relative age receiving a diagnosis of ADHD, and another is that assigning a diagnostic label of ADHD leads to unexplored carryover effects of the initial diagnosis that persist over time. Future studies should be conducted to explore these interpretations further. Funding None.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,030 | 0,067 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,017 | 0,059 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,006 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».