ReviewChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Cross-Informant Agreement and Discrepancies in ADHD Assessment During Adolescence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesAssessment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) requires information across settings, but reports from adolescents, caregivers, teachers, and clinicians are often only partly concordant. This review synthesized cross-informant agreement and discrepancies in ADHD assessment among adolescents aged 10-19 years.
methodsMEDLINE, CINAHL, ERIC and Academic Search Complete were searched through EBSCO, together with PubMed and Scopus, on 19 July 2026. Eligible primary quantitative studies compared at least two independent informants assessing the same adolescent ADHD domain. Methodological quality was appraised with an adapted 11-item QAREL framework. Pearson correlations were pooled after Fisher
resultsThe searches identified 1447 records; 30 reports (282 outcomes) were included. Caregiver-adolescent pooled
conclusionsInformant reports were positively related on average, but the magnitude of agreement was highly heterogeneous and imprecisely estimated. Wide intervals, including caregiver-adolescent prediction intervals crossing zero and caregiver-teacher confidence intervals crossing zero, indicate that little or no agreement remains plausible in some comparable settings. Reports should therefore not be treated as clinically interchangeable, and pooled estimates should not be interpreted as universal levels of agreement.
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.