Embedded Files
Multimodal Assessment of Emotion Dysregulation in Children with and without ADHD and Disruptive Behavior Disorders (2024)
Melissa L Hernandez, Alexis M Garcia, Jamie A Spiegel, Anthony S Dick, Paulo A Graziano
Objective: We sought to explore if specific domains of emotion dysregulation (emotion regulation [EREG], emotional reactivity/lability [EREL], emotion recognition/understanding [ERU], and callous-unemotional [CU] behaviors) were uniquely associated with diagnostic classifications.
Method: This study utilized a multimodal (parent/teacher [P/T] reports and behavioral observations) approach to examine emotion dysregulation in a sample of young children (68.7% boys; mean age = 5.47, SD = 0.77, 81.4% Latinx) with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD Only; n = 46), ADHD + disruptive behavior disorders (ADHD+DBD; n = 129), and typically developing (TD) children (n = 148).
Results: All three diagnostic groups were significantly different from one another on P/T reports of EREG, EREL and CU. For the ADHD+DBD group, P/T reported worse EREG and EREL, and higher mean scores of CU, compared to both ADHD Only and TD groups. The ADHD+DBD group also performed significantly worse than the TD group (but not the ADHD Only group) on observed measures of EREG, EREL and ERU. P/T reported EREG, EREL and CU for the ADHD Only group were significantly worse than the TD group. Using multinomial logistic regression, P/T reported EREG, EREL, and CU were significantly associated with diagnostic status above and beyond observed measures of emotion dysregulation. The model successfully classified children with ADHD+DBD (91.3%) and TD (95.9%); however, children in the ADHD Only group were correctly identified only 45.7% of time.
Conclusion: Our findings suggest that measures of emotion dysregulation may be particularly helpful in correctly identifying children with ADHD+DBD, but not necessarily children with ADHD Only.
Journal of Child & Adolescent Psychology, Vol 53(3) 444-459
DOI: 10.1080/15374416.2024.2303706
Are Reading Interventions Effective for At-Risk Readers with ADHD? A Meta-Analysis (2023)
Elizabeth S.M. Chan, Jeffrey A. Shero, Eric D. Hand, Alissa M. Cole, Fatou Gaye, Jamie A. Spiegel, and Michael J. Kofler
Objective: Utilizing a multi-level meta-analytic approach, this review is the first to systematically quantify the efficacy of reading interventions for school-aged children with ADHD, and identify potential factors that may increase the success of reading-related interventions for these children.
Method: 18 studies (15 peer-reviewed articles, 3 dissertations) published from 1986 to 2020 (N=564) were meta-analyzed.
Results: Findings revealed reading interventions are highly effective for improving reading skills based on both study-developed/curriculum-based measures (g=1.91) and standardized/ norm-referenced achievement tests (g=1.11) in high-quality studies of children with rigorously- diagnosed ADHD. Reading interventions that include at least 30 hours of intervention targeting decoding/phonemic awareness meet all benchmarks to be considered a Level 1 (Well-Established) Evidence-Based Practice with Strong Research Support for children with ADHD based on clinical and special education criteria.
Journal of Attention Disorders 2023, Vol 27(2) 182-200
DOI: 10.1177/10870547221130111
Alissa M. Cole, Elizabeth S. M. Chan, Fatou Gaye, Jamie A. Spiegel, Elia F. Soto, and Michael J. Kofler
The “simple view of reading” is an influential model of reading comprehension that asserts that children’s reading comprehension performance can be explained entirely by their decoding and language comprehension skills. Children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) often exhibit difficulty across all three of these reading domains on standardized achievement tests, yet it is unclear whether the simple view of reading is sufficient to explain reading comprehension performance for these children. The current study is the first to use multiple indicators and latent estimates to examine the veracity of key predictions from the simple view of reading in a clinically evaluated sample of 250 children with and without ADHD (ages 8–13, Mage = 10.29, SD = 1.47; 93 girls; 70% White/non-Hispanic). Results of the full-sample structural equation model revealed that decoding and language comprehension explained all (R² = .99) of the variance in reading comprehension for children with and without ADHD. Further, multigroup modeling (ADHD, non-ADHD) indicated that there was no difference in the quantity of variance explained for children with ADHD versus clinically evaluated children without ADHD and that the quantity of explained variance did not differ from 100% for either group. Sensitivity analyses indicated that these effects were generally robust to control for monomethod bias, time sampling error, and IQ. These findings are consistent with “simple view” predictions that decoding and language comprehension are both necessary and together sufficient for explaining children’s reading comprehension skills. The findings extend prior work by indicating that the “simple view” holds for both children with ADHD and clinically evaluated children without ADHD.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 115(5), 700–714
Graziano, P. A., Spiegel, J. A., Hayes, T., Arcia, E., & Sundari Foundation
Objective: As part of a larger community-based, service-driven research project, the primary purpose of this pilot randomized study was to examine the feasibility and acceptability of delivering time-limited adaptations of parent–child interaction therapy (PCIT) and child–parent psychotherapy (CPP) within a sample of children experiencing homelessness. The secondary goal was to examine the promise of both interventions in improving parent/child outcomes.
Method: One hundred forty-four young children (18 month–5 years old; M = 3.48, SD = 1.09; 43.1% female; 78.5% Black/African American; 27.1% Hispanic) and their mothers were recruited from a women’s homeless shelter and randomly assigned to 12 weeks of either PCIT or CPP delivered by shelter clinicians on-site. Attendance, fidelity, and program satisfaction were obtained. Families completed pre- and postintervention assessments, including observational data on maternal verbalizations during a child-led play session.
Results: Both time-limited PCIT and time-limited CPP were successfully implemented with similarly high levels of intervention fidelity (>90%) and satisfaction by mothers (85%). Completion rates were similar across both time-limited PCIT (76.6%) and time-limited CPP (71.4%). Both time-limited CPP and PCIT resulted in decreases in children’s posttraumatic stress, parental stress, and increases in maternal positive verbalizations. Only time-limited PCIT resulted in significant improvements in externalizing behavior problems in children and reductions in maternal negative verbalizations.
Conclusions: Time-limited PCIT and CPP are acceptable, feasible, and hold significant promise for helping families within a homeless shelter environment and by extension, other transitional and/or shelter environments. A full randomized trial is warranted to determine which program may offer a more effective intervention.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 91(4), 192-207
https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000810
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse