ArticleEuropean child & adolescent psychiatry2024
Hidden in plain sight: how individual ADHD stakeholders have conflicting ideas about ADHD but do not address their own ambivalence.
Article in European child & adolescent psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unmet Needs of Children and Young Adults With ADHD: Insights From Key Stakeholders on Priorities for Stigma Reduction.Journal of attention disorders · 2025Article
- Taming the chaos ?! - part 2: limitations of using eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) to tackle the complexity in psychotherapy of children and adolescents.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Psychiatric classifications refer to clusters of behavioral symptoms. We know much about how psychiatric classifications are intended to be used in theory. Yet the scientific study of the practice of classification to date is limited. We aimed to explore how individuals navigate and make sense of the complexity surrounding an ADHD classification. We used thematic analysis to analyse stakeholder perspectives from seven focus groups: adults classified with ADHD, adolescents classified with ADHD, parents of children classified with ADHD, clinicians, researchers, teachers, and policy makers. We found seven themes in how stakeholders navigate the classification ADHD. Yet, what stood out was an overarching discursive pattern: individual stakeholders expressed highly ambivalent ideas about ADHD but did not address their own ambivalence. We suggest that promoting a social kinds perspective on ADHD may help us navigate the complexity and ambivalence associated with ADHD more competently.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.