Prevalence and Diagnosis Rates of Childhood ADHD Among Racial-Ethnic Groups in a Public Mental Health System
Abstract
Objective:
This study estimated the proportions of Hispanic and non-Hispanic white and black children ages three to 17 with a diagnosis of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) receiving services from the New York State public mental health system (NYS PMHS) and their annual treated ADHD prevalence rates. Findings were compared with those of recent national studies of general population samples.
Methods:
Data were from a 2011 survey of users of NYS PMHS nonresidential services. Adjusted odds ratios compared the probability of an ADHD diagnosis among the groups by age, gender, and insurance type. Prevalence rates were compared among groups by age and gender.
Results:
An estimated 133,091 children used the NYS PMHS, of whom 31% had an ADHD diagnosis. The prevalence rate of ADHD among whites was significantly lower than that among Hispanics or blacks in all gender and age groups except Hispanic females ages 13 to 17. White children were significantly less likely than black children to receive an ADHD diagnosis.
Conclusions:
National studies have reported higher ADHD rates among white children. Compared with children in the NYS PMHS, those in national studies had multiple access points to care, including private psychiatrists and clinicians and primary care practitioners. The higher reported ADHD rates in national studies may reflect higher rates of private insurance among white children, which would increase the likelihood of their using private practitioners. Cultural factors that influence whether and where care is sought and whether practitioners appropriately diagnosis ADHD may also explain the difference in findings.
Four recent national studies have reported estimates of prevalence rates of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) among children by racial-ethnic group (1–4). The rate for white children was found to be higher than for Hispanic children and equal to or higher than the rate for black children. These studies varied in sampling methods, which makes the consistent findings of higher rates for white children all the more striking. The Early Childhood Longitudinal Study followed a nationally representative cohort of U.S. schoolchildren from kindergarten through the eighth grade (1). Parents reported whether their child had received an ADHD diagnosis from a care provider. The study found that compared with white children, Hispanic children were 44% less likely and African-American children were 64% less likely to have received an ADHD diagnosis by the time they were in eighth grade. The National Survey of Children’s Health, used by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to obtain national ADHD prevalence rates, is based on data from a cross-sectional sample of households and on parent reports obtained by telephone for a randomly selected child in the household. The parent is asked whether the child has received a diagnosis of ADHD from any caregiver (2). In 2011, rates were similar among white (9.8%) and black (9.5%) children, and rates for both were higher than among Hispanic children (5.8%). Data collected in the 2004–2006 National Health Interview Survey from a sample of children ages six to 17, in which “caseness” is also based on parent reports, indicated that rates of ADHD diagnosis among Hispanic children (5.3%) and non-Hispanic black children (8.6%) were lower than among non-Hispanic white children (9.8%) (3).
Froehlich and colleagues (4) used 2001–2004 data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, a general population survey, and reported rates of ADHD among children ages eight to 15 on the basis of direct assessment made by a parent or caregiver with a structured instrument that led to a DSM-IV diagnosis. The rate among white children (9.8%) was similar to that among black children (8.7%) but higher than that among Mexican-American children (6%). Notably, in the first three cited studies, rates were based on parent report of receipt of a diagnosis from any type of care provider. Froehlich and colleagues’ estimates, which were based on rates among children who may not have been in treatment, are closest to population-based estimates of the true prevalence of ADHD.
In this study, we examined data from children ages three to 17 who were receiving care in the New York State (NYS) public mental health system (PMHS), a system that does not include mental health providers in private practice or primary care physicians who provide mental health services. The study was undertaken to determine whether higher rates of ADHD would be found among white children using the PMHS, in which a smaller set of providers is covered and which notably excludes primary care physicians. We contrast our findings with national findings and propose reasons for observed differences in ADHD rates. We estimated total prevalence rates for use of nonresidential PMHS services and ADHD prevalence rates for whites, blacks, and Hispanics. For these groups, we estimated the proportion of children who received an ADHD diagnosis and compared the odds of blacks and Hispanics versus whites receiving an ADHD diagnosis, controlling for age, gender, and insurance type.
Methods
Data were from the 2011 NYS Office of Mental Health biennial one-week Patient Characteristics Survey (5) (PCS) of all persons receiving services in a typical week in mental health programs funded, certified, or operated by the NYS Office of Mental Health (that is, all programs in the PMHS). In NYS, the PMHS is comprehensive and covers programs that provide mental health services delivered by any type of psychiatric practitioner, including psychiatrists, social workers, psychologists, case managers, and others; however, the PMHS does not include psychiatric services received in either noncertified or solo practices or delivered by primary care physicians. School-based clinics that provide mental health services are in the PMHS. Note that the word “public” does not refer to the type of insurance, and children with public or private insurance may use PMHS providers. Those with private insurance may use the PMHS by preference or because of a shortage of solo-practice child psychiatric practitioners, which is a particular problem in upstate rural areas.
The study used PCS data collected for children ages three to 17 who were receiving nonresidential emergency, outpatient, or brief crisis services or community supports. Data on clinical diagnosis (DSM-IV-TR), race-ethnicity, age, gender, and type of insurance were included. Diagnosis was dichotomized (ADHD diagnosis and no ADHD diagnosis) and included both primary and secondary diagnoses. Data for three racial-ethnic groups were examined: Hispanic, non-Hispanic white (hereinafter called white), and non-Hispanic black (hereinafter called black). Age groups were three to seven, eight to 12, and 13 to 17. Insurance type was dichotomized (nonprivate and private). Nonprivate included public payers. Respondents who selected “none or other” were included in the nonprivate group. Those with missing data and those who selected “none or other” were included in all counts except the logistic regression described below. For rate calculations, children were grouped into age, gender, and race-ethnicity subgroups. The survey data were deidentified, and because the study was neither clinical research nor a clinical trial, it received exempt status from the Nathan Kline Institute for Psychiatric Research Institutional Review Board.
Data from the one-week sample are used to estimate the annual number of persons served in nonresidential services, by use of a statistical method (6) employed by the state since 1988. The accuracy of the method has been tested with data from a NYS county system that collects data over time on all mental health service use. It was shown that the estimate of the annual number was close to the actual number (7).
The annual prevalence rate of use of PMHS nonresidential services was estimated as the number of persons per 1,000 in the general population who used a PMHS provider for at least one nonresidential service during the year (hereinafter referred to as the total PMHS prevalence rate). This rate is a global measure of access to the PMHS. The annual ADHD prevalence rate among users of PMHS nonresidential services is the number of individuals per 1,000 in the general population who have used a PHMS provider for at least one nonresidential service during the year and who have received a primary or secondary diagnosis of ADHD by a PMHS provider (hereinafter referred to as the ADHD PMHS prevalence rate). The numerators of these two prevalence rates—total PMHS prevalence rate and ADHD PMHS prevalence rate—are the annualized number in treatment and the annualized number with ADHD, respectively. The denominators of both rates reflect the sizes of the racial-ethnic age group in the population, and these data were obtained from the 2010 census (8). The ADHD PMHS diagnosis rate is the proportion of children who received a diagnosis of ADHD among PMHS users during 2011. The diagnosis was made during or before the sample week. Although some children may have received the diagnosis outside the PMHS, all diagnoses were reconfirmed by PMHS providers. The ADHD PMHS prevalence rate is the product of the total PMHS prevalence rate and the ADHD PMHS diagnosis rate.
The percentages of children with a particular characteristic in the annualized sample were compared among racial-ethnic groups with an asymptotic chi square test that takes into account the unequal variances of the estimators and is performed conditionally on the estimated size of the respective groups (7). To test equality of prevalence rates, Fieller's theorem was used to form 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for prevalence ratios (7). If the interval does not cover 1, the null hypothesis of no difference in rates is rejected at the 5% level. We analyzed diagnosis rates by using a logistic regression model to estimate the odds of receiving an ADHD diagnosis, controlling for race-ethnicity, gender, age, and insurance type. The annualized sample used in the regression comprised those who had complete data on all variables in the model (total N=123,358; children with ADHD, N=40,000). The logistic regression model included main effects of the control variables and interaction terms of race-ethnicity with the other control variables. For males and for females within each racial-ethnic group, the odds of having an ADHD diagnosis compared with whites were separately estimated for those with private and nonprivate insurance. Differences were considered statistically significant if a 95% Wald CI did not cover 1.
Results
A total of 32,047 children in the one-week sample received PMHS nonresidential services, which yielded an estimated 133,091 children (CI=129,169–136,913) served in 2011. As shown in Table 1¸ 38% of the one-week sample had an ADHD diagnosis. As shown in Table 2, the estimated number of children with ADHD treated in the year was 40,773 (CI=38,947–42,600). Therefore, 31% of the annualized sample of 133,091 children had ADHD diagnoses. In the annualized ADHD sample, 40% were white, 28% were black, and 32% were Hispanic; 75% were males, and 49% were eight to 12 years of age. The percentage of children ages three to seven with an ADHD diagnosis differed among groups; the percentage was lower among whites than among blacks or Hispanics. Among those with ADHD, the percentage with private insurance among whites (32%) was about twice as high as among blacks (16%) and more than three times as high as among Hispanics (9%).
| Characteristic | Total | ADHD | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | % | N | % | |
| All children ages 3–17 | 32,047 | 100 | 12,192 | 38 |
| Age | ||||
| 3–7 | 4,914 | 15.3 | 2,089 | 17.1 |
| 8–12 | 13,182 | 41.1 | 6,177 | 50.7 |
| 13–17 | 13,951 | 43.5 | 3,926 | 32.2 |
| Gender | ||||
| Male | 18,734 | 58.5 | 8,996 | 73.8 |
| Female | 13,313 | 41.5 | 3,196 | 26.2 |
| Race-ethnicity | ||||
| White non-Hispanic | 13,196 | 41.2 | 4,702 | 38.6 |
| Black non-Hispanic | 7,732 | 24.1 | 3,332 | 27.3 |
| Hispanic | 11,119 | 34.7 | 4,158 | 34.1 |
| Type of insurance | ||||
| Private | 7,120 | 22.2 | 2,205 | 18.1 |
| Nonprivate | 23,640 | 73.8 | 9,736 | 79.9 |
| Missing or unknown | 1,287 | 4.0 | 251 | 2.1 |
a
Data for 2011 were from a survey of service use in a selected week conducted biennially by the New York State Office of Mental Health.
| Variable | White non-Hispanic | Black non-Hispanic | Hispanic | Total | pa | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | % | N | % | N | % | N | % | ||
| Sample | |||||||||
| ADHD | 16,304 | 11,405 | 13,064 | 40,773 | |||||
| Total | 55,909 | 34,411 | 42,771 | 133,091 | |||||
| As % of total | |||||||||
| ADHD | — | 40.0 | — | 28.0 | — | 32.0 | — | 100 | |
| Total | — | 42.0 | — | 25.9 | — | 32.1 | — | 100 | |
| Male | |||||||||
| ADHD | 11,952 | 73.3 | 8,266 | 72.5 | 10,203 | 78.1 | 30,422 | 74.6 | .706 |
| Total | 31,984 | 57.2 | 20,071 | 58.3 | 25,030 | 58.5 | 77,085 | 57.9 | .958 |
| Age | |||||||||
| 3–7 | |||||||||
| ADHD | 2,205 | 13.5 | 2,419 | 21.2 | 2,546 | 19.5 | 7,170 | 17.6 | .008 |
| Total | 8,453 | 15.1 | 7,077 | 20.6 | 6,867 | 16.1 | 22,397 | 16.8 | .020 |
| 8–12 | |||||||||
| ADHD | 7,868 | 48.3 | 5,344 | 46.9 | 6,544 | 50.1 | 19,757 | 48.5 | .885 |
| Total | 19,925 | 35.6 | 12,520 | 36.4 | 16,404 | 38.4 | 48,849 | 36.7 | .584 |
| 13–17 | |||||||||
| ADHD | 6,230 | 38.2 | 3,642 | 31.9 | 3,974 | 30.4 | 13,847 | 34.0 | .071 |
| Total | 27,531 | 49.2 | 14,814 | 43.1 | 19,500 | 45.6 | 61,845 | 46.5 | .099 |
| Insurance | |||||||||
| Nonprivate | 10,639 | 65.3 | 9,333 | 81.8 | 11,637 | 89.1 | 31,609 | 77.5 | <.001 |
| ADHD | 31,008 | 55.3 | 24,328 | 70.6 | 34,634 | 80.8 | 89,969 | 67.4 | <.001 |
| Total | |||||||||
| Private | |||||||||
| ADHD | 5,162 | 31.7 | 1,815 | 15.9 | 1,179 | 9.0 | 8,156 | 20.0 | <.001 |
| Total | 20,568 | 36.7 | 6,266 | 18.2 | 6,013 | 14.0 | 32,850 | 24.6 | <.001 |
a
Hypothesis test of equality of percentages among racial-ethnic groups based on the conditional asymptotic chi square test (8)
As shown in Table 3, the total PMHS annual prevalence rate per 1,000 children ages three to 17 was 40.2, and rates for racial-ethnic groups were as follows: whites, 29.6; blacks, 55.9; and Hispanics, 53.0. The ADHD PMHS annual prevalence rate per 1,000 children ages three to 17 was 12.3, and rates for racial-ethnic groups were as follows: whites, 8.6; blacks, 18.5; and Hispanics, 16.2. Black and Hispanic ADHD prevalence rates were significantly higher than white rates; the rate among females (6.4) was significantly lower than among males (18.0). For each of the gender and age groups, ADHD prevalence rates for blacks and Hispanics were significantly higher than rates for whites, except for females ages 13 to 17, for whom the difference was not significant (Figure 1). Among age groups, prevalence rates were highest for children ages eight to 12 in all racial-ethnic groups.
| Variable | ADHD prevalence rate per 1,000b | Total PMHS prevalence rate per 1,000c | ADHD diagnosis rated |
|---|---|---|---|
| All children | 12.3 | 40.2 | .31 |
| Race-ethnicity | |||
| White non-Hispanic | 8.6e | 29.6f | .29g |
| Black non-Hispanic | 18.5e | 55.9f | .33g |
| Hispanic | 16.2e | 53.0f | .31 |
| Male | |||
| White non-Hispanic | 12.3h | 33.0i | .37 |
| Black non-Hispanic | 26.5h | 64.4i | .41 |
| Hispanic | 24.8h | 60.8i | .41 |
| All males | 18.0 | 45.5 | .39 |
| Female | |||
| White non-Hispanic | 4.7j | 26.0k | .18 |
| Black non-Hispanic | 10.3j | 47.2k | .22 |
| Hispanic | 7.2j | 45.0k | .16 |
| All females | 6.4 | 34.6 | .18 |
a
PMHS, public mental health system. The rates are based on the estimated annualized population size (N=133,091). Significance of pairwise contrasts is based on Fieller’s theorem, which was used to calculate 95% confidence intervals.
b
Number of children in the general population (per 1,000) who received a diagnosis of ADHD from a provider in the PMHS).
c
Number of children in the general population (per 1,000) who used a provider in the PMHS for at least one service during the year.
d
Proportion of children who received an ADHD diagnosis in 2011.
e–k
For all categories (race-ethnicity, male, and female), values with the same footnote are significantly different (p<.05) from one another.
FIGURE 1. ADHD rates per 1,000 in an annualized 2011 sample of children using nonresidential services in the New York State public mental health system, by gender, racial-ethnic group, and agea
aRates for females were significantly higher (p<.05) among blacks and Hispanics than among whites, except for Hispanic females ages 13 to 17, for whom the difference was not significant. Among males, rates were significantly higher (p<.05) among blacks and Hispanics than among whites for all age groups.
The ADHD PMHS diagnosis rate in 2011 for blacks (.33) was significantly higher (p<.05) than for whites (.29), while the rate for Hispanics (.31) did not differ significantly from that for whites. Across all age groups, the diagnosis rate for females (.18) was significantly (p<.05) lower than for males (.39) (Table 3).
In the logistic regression model, all main effects and interactions were significant (p<.001). Blacks had significantly greater odds than their white counterparts of having an ADHD diagnosis (adjusted ORs [AORs] of approximately 1.2 for females and for males). Both Hispanic females and males had significantly lower odds than their white gender counterparts of having an ADHD diagnosis (female AOR=.71; male AOR=.89). When AORs were examined by type of insurance similar findings were obtained, except for Hispanic males; Hispanic males with private insurance had significantly lower odds than white males of having an ADHD diagnosis, but those with public insurance did not (Table 4).
| Group | Nonprivate insurance | Private insurance | Any insurance type | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AOR | 95% Wald CI | AOR | 95% Wald CI | AOR | 95% Wald CI | |
| Black females (reference: white females) | 1.16* | 1.10–1.23 | 1.17* | 1.08–1.27 | 1.20* | 1.13–1.27 |
| Black males (reference: white males) | 1.13* | 1.10–1.18 | 1.14* | 1.07–1.22 | 1.17* | 1.12–1.22 |
| Hispanic females (reference: white females) | .78* | .74–.83 | .62* | .57–.68 | .71* | .66–.75 |
| Hispanic males (reference: white males) | .99 | .95–1.03 | .78* | .73–.85 | .89* | .85–.93 |
a
Based on annualized sample with nonmissing insurance data (N=123,358). Logistic regression analysis adjusted for age (mean age=11.9 years), gender, and insurance type.
*
95% CI does not include 1.
Discussion
The prevalence rates of ADHD among white children using PMHS nonresidential services were lower than rates among both black and Hispanic children. This finding is in contrast to higher rates among white children that have been consistently reported in recent studies (1–3). The difference in findings may result from the role that insurance plays in access to certain types of providers among various racial-ethnic groups, from cultural differences in care-seeking behaviors, or from diagnostic skills of providers, which may lead to over- and underdiagnosing. [A probability framework developed to motivate these reasons and frame the discussion is included in an online supplement to this article.]
Because of the type of insurance they carry, white families may be more likely than black or Hispanic families to use private psychiatric practitioners and primary care physicians than to use PMHS providers. For 2011, the prevalence of ADHD among children using PMHS nonresidential services was estimated at 1.2% (12.3 per 1,000 population), whereas the CDC reported that approximately 7.7% of NYS children ages four to 17 had a current diagnosis of attention-deficit disorder or ADHD made by a health care provider, as reported by their parents (9). On the basis of these statistics, only about 16% of children who had a parent-reported ADHD diagnosis were served by the PMHS. The CDC rates were based on use of a health care system larger than the PMHS, because parents reported receipt of an ADHD diagnosis from any care provider. In 2011, parents whose children used the PMHS were less likely to have private insurance (25%) than persons in the state; statewide 53% of children ages birth to 18 were covered by private insurance (10). In NYS in 2007, 79% of white children had private health insurance, compared with 35% of Hispanic children and 50% of black children (11). Persons in the general population who have either public insurance or no insurance might be more likely to use the PMHS, whereas those with private insurance might be more likely to seek services from private psychiatric practitioners not in the PMHS or from general practitioners. Notably, office visits to treat ADHD were reported to have grown by 66% between 2000 and 2010, which was mainly accounted for by families seeking help from pediatricians (12).
Differences in help-seeking behaviors may also explain why white families make greater use than black and Hispanic families of private psychiatrists and other providers in the private health sector for their children’s ADHD symptoms. Culture shapes parental expectations of children’s behaviors both at home and in school. Cohen and colleagues (13) reported that African-American parents may not respond to their children’s ADHD symptoms in a fashion similar to Caucasian parents and may not respond as early after the appearance of these symptoms. Similarly, Bussing and colleagues (14) noted that although black parents may find a hyperactive child difficult to manage, they may not view hyperactivity as a medical problem, which would reduce their motivation to mention it to a primary care provider. Even if black parents are troubled by such behaviors, an aversion to the use of psychiatric medications (especially for their children) may impede early care seeking (15). However, teachers are not likely to miss the symptoms of hyperactivity (16), and they may refer black children to known programs or clinics in the PMHS rather than to private psychiatrists or pediatricians. Hispanic mothers, particularly those who are less acculturated to U.S. systems, and teachers may not seek help for inattention and daydreaming (17) among teenage Hispanic girls, because these symptoms may not be viewed as problematic to their participation in quiet activities and in household-related activities (18).
In addition, non-PMHS clinicians may diagnose differently from those in the PMHS. Psychiatric clinicians in private practice and in the PMHS have received similar training and are thus not likely to differ. However, primary care physicians may not be adequately trained to make psychiatric diagnoses, which may lead to under- or overdiagnosing of ADHD among children. Health practitioners may not use structured assessment tools or may not elicit sufficient information, particularly culturally nuanced information, to make a valid ADHD diagnosis. We are unaware of any studies comparing ADHD diagnoses made by psychiatric practitioners to those made by primary care physicians, most particularly with respect to differences in diagnosing patients from racial-ethnic groups.
There are limitations to the interpretation of findings. NYS data may be idiosyncratic and not generalizable to the national picture. However, this is highly unlikely because most national data (for example, on insurance and ADHD rates) are aligned with NYS data. In addition, data for NYS reported by the CDC are in line with national rates. Possible cultural explanations for our findings are derived from a literature that is anecdotal and speculative and often based on small qualitative studies. Diagnoses in this study were assigned by providers, and we cannot comment on the extent to which any diagnostic guidelines were followed or whether input was obtained from both parents and teachers. Clinically based diagnoses, however, are unarguably more reliable than those based solely on parent self-reports, which were used in three of the studies described above (1–3). Clinically based diagnoses are also more germane to the comparison of PMHS rates than are parent or caregiver reports of diagnoses. Our speculation that private insurance played a role in driving access to providers outside the PMHS is limited by lack of data or prior research. Answers to the following questions would help substantiate some of our speculations: Do children from racial-ethnic minority groups who have private insurance differ between sectors? Are parents with private insurance more apt to choose providers outside the PMHS? Do children who use the PMHS have more comorbidities than those who do not use the PMHS? These questions outline an agenda for future research. Finally, we cannot rule out explanations proposed by other authors for variations in rates of ADHD, such as differential environmental risk exposures (19), genetics (20), and health complications (4).
Conclusions
Our findings suggest that the higher ADHD prevalence rates among white children that have been reported in national studies are likely attributable to greater use of primary care physicians by white families, between-group differences in care-seeking behaviors, and higher rates of private insurance among white families. Revisiting the findings of this study when the insurance coverage scene under the Affordable Care Act has settled down may further clarify the impact of insurance on ADHD prevalence rates. To determine whether differences in diagnostic practices between PMHS and non-PMHS clinicians are sufficient to result in our findings of lower ADHD prevalence among white children—in contrast to previous studies—will require studies of ADHD diagnostic concordance, particularly with regard to differences between psychiatric clinicians and primary care clinicians. In addition, the somewhat higher PMHS ADHD diagnosis rate in 2011 for blacks and the lower diagnostic rate for Hispanics, especially for females, suggest the possibility of misdiagnosis by PMHS clinicians that might be based on misunderstanding of cultural differences. Children from racial-ethnic minority groups who seek care from any provider would likely benefit from more nuanced culturally based diagnostic assessments.
Footnote
Opinions expressed are solely those of the authors.
Supplementary Material
File (appi.ps.201400364.ds001.pdf)
- View/Download
- 61.80 KB
References
1.
Morgan PL, Staff J, Hillemeier MM, et al: Racial and ethnic disparities in ADHD diagnosis from kindergarten to eighth grade. Pediatrics 132:85–93, 2013
2.
Visser SN, Danielson ML, Bitsko RH, et al: Trends in the parent-report of health care provider–diagnosed and medicated attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: United States, 2003–2011. Journal of the Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 53:34–46, 2014
3.
Pastor PN, Reuben CA: Diagnosed attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and learning disability: United States, 2004–2006. Vital and Health Statistics 237:1–14, 2008
4.
Froehlich TE, Lanphear BP, Epstein JN, et al: Prevalence, recognition, and treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in a national sample of US children. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine 161:857–864, 2007
5.
Siegel CE, Wanderling J, Haugland G, et al: Access to and use of non-inpatient services in New York State among racial-ethnic groups. Psychiatric Services 64:156–164, 2013
6.
Laska EM, Meisner M, Siegel C: Estimating the size of a population from a single sample. Biometrics 49:209–220, 1993
7.
Laska EM, Meisner M, Wanderling J, et al: Estimating treated prevalence and service utilization rates: assessing disparities in mental health. Statistics in Medicine 29:1673–1680, 2010
8.
Bridged-Race Population Estimates 1990–2012 Request. Atlanta, Ga, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Available at wonder.cdc.gov/bridged-race-v2012.html. Accessed June 26, 2014
9.
State-Based Prevalence Data of Parent Reported ADHD Diagnosis by a Health Care provider. Atlanta, Ga, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2013. Available at www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/adhd/prevalence.html. Accessed June 26, 2014
10.
State Health Facts: Health Insurance Coverage of Children 0–18. Menlo Park, Calif, Kaiser Family Foundation. Available at kff.org/other/state-indicator/children-0-18. Accessed June 26, 2014
11.
State Snapshots. Baltimore, Child and Adolescent Health Measurement Initiative, Data Resource Center for Child and Adolescent Health. Available at www.childhealthdata.org/browse/snapshots. Accessed June 26, 2014
12.
McCormack L: Pediatricians and ADHD: How to Tell If Your Child Is Getting Careful Diagnosis and Quality Care. New York, Child Mind Institute, 2012 . Available at www.childmind.org/en/posts/articles/2012-6-5-adhd-pediatrics-finding-right-provider. Accessed June 26, 2014
13.
Cohen MJ, Riccio CA, Gonzalez JJ: Methodological differences in the diagnosis of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: impact on prevalence. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders 2:31–38, 1994
14.
Bussing R, Schoenberg NE, Perwien AR: Knowledge and information about ADHD: evidence of cultural differences among African-American and white parents. Social Science and Medicine 46:919–928, 1998
15.
Schnittker J: Misgivings of medicine? African Americans’ skepticism of psychiatric medication. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 44:506–524, 2003
16.
Sax L, Kautz KJ: Who first suggests the diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder? Annals of Family Medicine 1:171–174, 2003
17.
Livingston R: Cultural issues in diagnosis and treatment of ADHD. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 38:1591–1594, 1999
18.
Raffaelli M, Ontai LL: Gender socialization in Latino/a families: results from two retrospective studies. Sex Roles 50:287–299, 2004
19.
Polańska K, Jurewicz J, Hanke W: Review of current evidence on the impact of pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls and selected metals on attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children. International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health 26:16–38, 2013
20.
Khan SA, Faraone SV: The genetics of ADHD: a literature review of 2005. Current Psychiatry Reports 8:393–397, 2006
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Cover: Print table, by Frank Lloyd Wright (maker: William E. Nemmers), 1902–1903. White oak. Purchase, Emily Crane Chadbourne Bequest, 1972, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York City. Image copyright © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Image source: Art Resource, New York City.
History
Received: 19 August 2014
Revision received: 1 February 2015
Revision received: 20 April 2015
Accepted: 3 June 2015
Published online: 1 October 2015
Published in print: February 01, 2016
Authors
Competing Interests
The authors report no financial relationships with commercial interests.
Funding Information
NYS Office of Mental Health through the NKI Center of Excellence in Culturally Competent Mental Health
The study was supported by the New York State Office of Mental Health–funded Nathan Kline Institute Center of Excellence in Culturally Competent Mental Health.Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Export Citations
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.
For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.
View Options
View options
PDF/EPUB
View PDF/EPUBLogin options
Already a subscriber? Access your subscription through your login credentials or your institution for full access to this article.
Personal login Institutional Login Open Athens loginNot a subscriber?
PsychiatryOnline subscription options offer access to the DSM-5-TR® library, books, journals, CME, and patient resources. This all-in-one virtual library provides psychiatrists and mental health professionals with key resources for diagnosis, treatment, research, and professional development.
Need more help? PsychiatryOnline Customer Service may be reached by emailing [email protected] or by calling 800-368-5777 (in the U.S.) or 703-907-7322 (outside the U.S.).