Differences between DSM-5-TR and ICD-11 revisions of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder : a commentary on implications and opportunities
- Gomez, Rapson, Chen, Wai, Houghton, Stephen
- Authors: Gomez, Rapson , Chen, Wai , Houghton, Stephen
- Date: 2023
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: World J Psychiatry Vol. 13, no. 5 (2023), p. 138-143
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Current ICD-11 descriptions for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) were recently published online, in the same year as the DSM-5-TR (text revised edition) was released. In this commentary, we compare and contrast the DSM-5/DSM-5-TR and ICD-11 diagnostic criteria, summarize important differences, and underscore their clinical and research implications. Overall, three major differences emerge: (1) The number of diagnostic criteria for inattention (IA), hyperactivity (HY) and impulsivity (IM) symptoms ( , DSM-5-TR has nine IA and nine HY/IM symptoms, whereas ICD-11 has 11 IA and 11 HY/IM sym-ptoms) (2) the clarity and standardization of diagnostic thresholds ( , the diagnostic thresholds for symptom count in IA and HY/IM domains are explicitly specified in DSM-5-TR, whereas in ICD-11 they are not) and (3) the partitioning of HY and IM symptoms into sub-dimensions ( , difference in partitioning HY and IM symptom domains relates to the differences between the current and previous editions of DSM and ICD, and this has important research implications). Currently, no ICD-11 based ADHD rating scales exist and while this absence represents an obstacle for respective research and clinical practice, it also presents opportunities for research development. This article highlights these challenges, possible remedies and novel research opportunities.
- Authors: Gomez, Rapson , Chen, Wai , Houghton, Stephen
- Date: 2023
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: World J Psychiatry Vol. 13, no. 5 (2023), p. 138-143
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Current ICD-11 descriptions for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) were recently published online, in the same year as the DSM-5-TR (text revised edition) was released. In this commentary, we compare and contrast the DSM-5/DSM-5-TR and ICD-11 diagnostic criteria, summarize important differences, and underscore their clinical and research implications. Overall, three major differences emerge: (1) The number of diagnostic criteria for inattention (IA), hyperactivity (HY) and impulsivity (IM) symptoms ( , DSM-5-TR has nine IA and nine HY/IM symptoms, whereas ICD-11 has 11 IA and 11 HY/IM sym-ptoms) (2) the clarity and standardization of diagnostic thresholds ( , the diagnostic thresholds for symptom count in IA and HY/IM domains are explicitly specified in DSM-5-TR, whereas in ICD-11 they are not) and (3) the partitioning of HY and IM symptoms into sub-dimensions ( , difference in partitioning HY and IM symptom domains relates to the differences between the current and previous editions of DSM and ICD, and this has important research implications). Currently, no ICD-11 based ADHD rating scales exist and while this absence represents an obstacle for respective research and clinical practice, it also presents opportunities for research development. This article highlights these challenges, possible remedies and novel research opportunities.
Inter-relationships between ADHD, ODD and impulsivity dimensions in emerging adults revealed by network analysis: extending the ‘trait impulsivity hypothesis’
- Gomez, Rapson, Stavropoulos, Vasileios, Watson, Shaun, Brown, Taylor, Chen, Wai
- Authors: Gomez, Rapson , Stavropoulos, Vasileios , Watson, Shaun , Brown, Taylor , Chen, Wai
- Date: 2022
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Heliyon Vol. 8, no. 10 (2022), p.
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Background: The trait-impulsivity hypothesis posits impulsivity as the underlying substrate of Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and Oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) symptom expressions. The current study applied network analysis to evaluate the inter-relationships of dimensions within ADHD (inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity) and ODD (anger/irritable, vindictiveness, and argumentative/defiant behavior) with components of impulsivity as captured by the UPPS-P model (negative urgency, lack of premeditation, lack of perseverance, sensation seeking, and positive urgency). Method: A total of 324 emerging adults (women = 246) from the general community completed questionnaires covering these dimensions. Results: Our findings showed that the ADHD and ODD dimensions were associated differentially with different types of impulsivity, in their unique patterns of network connectivities, a possibility that has had little attention in the trait-impulsivity hypothesis literature. Conclusions: This study is the first to tease out the unique associations of the ADHD and ODD dimensions with different types of impulsivity, and in that way provide new contributions to our understanding of the existing trait impulsivity theory. Our findings would be especially relevant to those interested in understanding how different dimensions of trait impulsivity underly the ADHD and ODD dimensions. © 2022 The Authors
- Authors: Gomez, Rapson , Stavropoulos, Vasileios , Watson, Shaun , Brown, Taylor , Chen, Wai
- Date: 2022
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Heliyon Vol. 8, no. 10 (2022), p.
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Background: The trait-impulsivity hypothesis posits impulsivity as the underlying substrate of Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and Oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) symptom expressions. The current study applied network analysis to evaluate the inter-relationships of dimensions within ADHD (inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity) and ODD (anger/irritable, vindictiveness, and argumentative/defiant behavior) with components of impulsivity as captured by the UPPS-P model (negative urgency, lack of premeditation, lack of perseverance, sensation seeking, and positive urgency). Method: A total of 324 emerging adults (women = 246) from the general community completed questionnaires covering these dimensions. Results: Our findings showed that the ADHD and ODD dimensions were associated differentially with different types of impulsivity, in their unique patterns of network connectivities, a possibility that has had little attention in the trait-impulsivity hypothesis literature. Conclusions: This study is the first to tease out the unique associations of the ADHD and ODD dimensions with different types of impulsivity, and in that way provide new contributions to our understanding of the existing trait impulsivity theory. Our findings would be especially relevant to those interested in understanding how different dimensions of trait impulsivity underly the ADHD and ODD dimensions. © 2022 The Authors
Network analyses of internet gaming disorder symptoms and their links with different types of motivation
- Gomez, Rapson, Stavropoulos, Vasileios, Tullett-Prado, Deon, Schivinski, Bruno, Chen, Wai
- Authors: Gomez, Rapson , Stavropoulos, Vasileios , Tullett-Prado, Deon , Schivinski, Bruno , Chen, Wai
- Date: 2022
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: BMC Psychiatry Vol. 22, no. 1 (2022), p.
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: The study used regularized partial correlation network analysis (EBICglasso) to examine the structure of DSM-5 internet gaming disorder (IGD) symptoms (network 1); and the associations of the IGD symptoms in the network with different types of motivation as defined in the self-determination theory i.e., intrinsic motivation (engaging in an activity for something unrelated to the activity), identified regulation (engaging in the activity because it aligns with one’s values and/or goals), external regulation (engagement in activity being driven by external rewards and/or approval), and amotivation (engaging in an activity without often understanding why) (network 2). Participants were 968 adults from the general community. They completed self-rating questionnaires covering IGD symptoms and different types of motivation. The findings for network 1 showed mostly positive connections between the symptoms within the IGD network. The most central symptom was loss of control, followed by continuation, withdrawal symptoms, and tolerance. In general, these symptoms were more strongly connected with each other than with the rest of the IGD symptoms. The findings for network 2 showed that the different types of motivation were connected differently with the different IGD symptoms. For instance, the likeliest motivation for the preoccupation and escape symptoms is intrinsic motivation, and for negative consequences, it is low identified regulation. Overall, the findings showed a novel understanding of the structure of the IGD symptoms, and the motivations underlying them. The clinical implications of the findings for assessment and treatment of IGD are discussed. © 2022, The Author(s).
- Authors: Gomez, Rapson , Stavropoulos, Vasileios , Tullett-Prado, Deon , Schivinski, Bruno , Chen, Wai
- Date: 2022
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: BMC Psychiatry Vol. 22, no. 1 (2022), p.
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: The study used regularized partial correlation network analysis (EBICglasso) to examine the structure of DSM-5 internet gaming disorder (IGD) symptoms (network 1); and the associations of the IGD symptoms in the network with different types of motivation as defined in the self-determination theory i.e., intrinsic motivation (engaging in an activity for something unrelated to the activity), identified regulation (engaging in the activity because it aligns with one’s values and/or goals), external regulation (engagement in activity being driven by external rewards and/or approval), and amotivation (engaging in an activity without often understanding why) (network 2). Participants were 968 adults from the general community. They completed self-rating questionnaires covering IGD symptoms and different types of motivation. The findings for network 1 showed mostly positive connections between the symptoms within the IGD network. The most central symptom was loss of control, followed by continuation, withdrawal symptoms, and tolerance. In general, these symptoms were more strongly connected with each other than with the rest of the IGD symptoms. The findings for network 2 showed that the different types of motivation were connected differently with the different IGD symptoms. For instance, the likeliest motivation for the preoccupation and escape symptoms is intrinsic motivation, and for negative consequences, it is low identified regulation. Overall, the findings showed a novel understanding of the structure of the IGD symptoms, and the motivations underlying them. The clinical implications of the findings for assessment and treatment of IGD are discussed. © 2022, The Author(s).
Factor Structure of the Sleep Disturbance Scale for Children (SDSC) in those with Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)
- Mancini, Vincent, Rudaizky, Daniel, Pearcy, Benjamin, Marriner, Angela, Pestell, Carmela, Gomez, Rapson, Bucks, Romola, Chen, Wai
- Authors: Mancini, Vincent , Rudaizky, Daniel , Pearcy, Benjamin , Marriner, Angela , Pestell, Carmela , Gomez, Rapson , Bucks, Romola , Chen, Wai
- Date: 2019
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Sleep Medicine: X Vol. 1, no. (2019), p.
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Objective: To examine the factor structure of the Sleep Disorder Scale for Children (SDSC) in children and adolescents with attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Method: The caregivers of 307 children with ADHD completed the SDSC. Standard and bifactor confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) evaluated the goodness-of-fit of competing factor structures. Results: The original and unidimensional factor structure produced sub-optimal fit. Bifactor exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed to examine the underlying structure of the SDSC. A revised bifactor solution comprising six-specific factors and a general factor was identified. A nested version of this model was deemed to be the preferred model, which also demonstrated good psychometric properties. Conclusion: There is evidence of a ‘general sleep difficulties’ factor in children with ADHD. Four of the six original factors were replicated in this study. However, the revised factor structure suggests that clinicians should be cautious of the utility of subscale scores pending further validation in ADHD samples. © 2019
- Authors: Mancini, Vincent , Rudaizky, Daniel , Pearcy, Benjamin , Marriner, Angela , Pestell, Carmela , Gomez, Rapson , Bucks, Romola , Chen, Wai
- Date: 2019
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Sleep Medicine: X Vol. 1, no. (2019), p.
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Objective: To examine the factor structure of the Sleep Disorder Scale for Children (SDSC) in children and adolescents with attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Method: The caregivers of 307 children with ADHD completed the SDSC. Standard and bifactor confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) evaluated the goodness-of-fit of competing factor structures. Results: The original and unidimensional factor structure produced sub-optimal fit. Bifactor exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed to examine the underlying structure of the SDSC. A revised bifactor solution comprising six-specific factors and a general factor was identified. A nested version of this model was deemed to be the preferred model, which also demonstrated good psychometric properties. Conclusion: There is evidence of a ‘general sleep difficulties’ factor in children with ADHD. Four of the six original factors were replicated in this study. However, the revised factor structure suggests that clinicians should be cautious of the utility of subscale scores pending further validation in ADHD samples. © 2019
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »