Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38895497›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024

The experience of effort in ADHD: a scoping review.

Danika Wagner, Samantha G Mason, John D Eastwood

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Danika WagnerThe Boredom Lab, Department of Psychology, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Samantha G MasonThe Boredom Lab, Department of Psychology, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada.
John D EastwoodThe Boredom Lab, Department of Psychology, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Mental effort plays a critical role in regulating cognition. However, the experience of mental effort may differ for individuals with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), a disorder for which sustained mental effort 'avoidance' or 'dislike' is a criterion in the DSM. We conducted a scoping review to characterize the literature on the experiences of effort in ADHD. Methods: This systematic scoping review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) Extension for Scoping Reviews and Joanna Briggs Methodology. PsycINFO (OVID), PsycINFO (ProQuest) and PubMed were searched for studies published in English before February 14, 2023. Studies must have included an ADHD population or a measure of ADHD symptomatology, in addition to a self-report measure of the experience of effort or the use of an effort preference paradigm. Two researchers reviewed all abstracts, and one researcher reviewed full-text articles. Results: Only 12 studies met the inclusion criteria. Several gaps and inconsistencies in the research were identified in terms of method, definitions of effort, measurements of ADHD, and sample characteristics. Moreover, the pattern of results on the experience of effort was mixed. Conclusion: Despite its diagnostic and conceptual significance, the experience of mental effort in ADHD is not well studied. Critical gaps were identified in the existing literature. A three-facet conceptualization of effort is proposed-specifically, task-elicited effort, volitionally exerted effort, and the affect associated with engaging in effort - to guide future explorations of the experience of effort in ADHD.

Indexed as

ADHDconscious experienceefforteffort preferencesmental effortself-report

Identifiers

PMID38895497
PMCPMC11184226

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.