Variable Patterns of Remission From ADHD in the Multimodal Treatment Study of ADHD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: It is estimated that childhood attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) remits by adulthood in approximately 50% of cases; however, this conclusion is typically based on single endpoints, failing to consider longitudinal patterns of ADHD expression. The authors investigated the extent to which children with ADHD experience recovery and variable patterns of remission by adulthood. METHODS: Children with ADHD (N=558) in the Multimodal Treatment Study of ADHD (MTA) underwent eight assessments over follow-ups ranging from 2 years (mean age, 10.44 years) to 16 years (mean age, 25.12 years) after baseline. The authors identified participants with fully remitted, partially remitted, and persistent ADHD at each time point on the basis of parent, teacher, and self-reports of ADHD symptoms and impairment, treatment utilization, and substance use and mental disorders. Longitudinal patterns of remission and persistence were identified that considered context and timing. RESULTS: Approximately 30% of children with ADHD experienced full remission at some point during the follow-up period; however, a majority of them (60%) experienced recurrence of ADHD after the initial period of remission. Only 9.1% of the sample demonstrated recovery (sustained remission) by study endpoint, and only 10.8% demonstrated stable ADHD persistence across study time points. Most participants with ADHD (63.8%) had fluctuating periods of remission and recurrence over time. CONCLUSIONS: The MTA findings challenge the notion that approximately 50% of children with ADHD outgrow the disorder by adulthood. Most cases demonstrated fluctuating symptoms between childhood and young adulthood. Although intermittent periods of remission can be expected in most cases, 90% of children with ADHD in MTA continued to experience residual symptoms into young adulthood.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".