Objective: Behavioral parent training (BPT) is an evidence-based intervention for children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), but little is known about the effects of separate techniques parents learn in BPT. Method: In a three-armed randomized controlled microtrial including parents of 92 children (4-12 years) with ADHD, we examined the efficacy of two sessions parent training involving either stimulus control techniques (antecedent-based condition (AC)) or contingency management techniques (consequent-based condition (CC)), compared to a waitlist. Primary outcome was daily parent-rated problem behaviors, secondary outcomes were parent-rated symptoms of ADHD and oppositional defiant disorder (ODD), and mental health-care consumption. Measures were completed at baseline (T0), immediately after the training (T1), at two weeks (T2) and three months (T3) follow-up. We also explored whether child and parent characteristics moderated treatment effects. Results: Compared to the waitlist, in the AC, daily rated problem behaviors improved at T1 (d= .56) and T2 (d= .65); in the CC, these behaviors only improved at T2 (d= .53). Daily rated problem behaviors within both conditions remained stable between T2 and T3. In the AC compared to the other conditions, inattention symptoms decreased at T1 and T2. For both active conditions compared to waitlist, hyperactivity-impulsivity symptoms decreased only at T2 and ODD symptoms did not decrease. No moderators were identified. Mental health-care consumption after training was low and did not differ between the active conditions. Conclusions: Brief training of parents in antecedent-or consequent-based techniques improves problem behaviors of children with ADHD. Antecedent-based techniques appear to be especially important to target inattention.

Objective: Behavioral teacher training is the most effective classroom-based intervention for children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, it is currently unknown which components of this intervention add to its effectiveness and for whom these are effective. Method: In this microtrial, teachers of 90 children with impairing levels of ADHD symptoms (6-12 years) were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: a short (2 sessions), individualized intervention consisting of either (A) antecedent-based techniques (stimulus control), (B) consequent-based techniques (contingency management) or (C) waitlist. Primary outcome was the average of five daily assessments of four individualized problem behaviors, assessed pre and post intervention and three months later. Moderation analyses were conducted to generate hypotheses on child, teacher and classroom factors that may contribute to technique effectiveness. Results: Multilevel analyses showed that both antecedent-and consequent-based techniques were equally and highly effective in reducing problem behaviors compared to the control condition (Cohen's d =.9); effects remained stable up to three months later. Child's age and class size were moderators of technique effectiveness. For younger children, consequent-based techniques were more effective than antecedent-based techniques, whereas for older children the effect was in the opposite direction. Further, beneficial effects of antecedent-based techniques increased when the number of students per class decreased, whilst effectiveness of consequent-based techniques did not depend on class size. Conclusions: This study shows that both antecedent-and consequent-based techniques are highly effective in reducing problem behavior of children with ADHD. Interventions may be adapted to the child's age and class size.

Children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms often experience social and emotional problems. Impaired facial emotion recognition has been suggested as a possible underlying mechanism, although impairments may depend on the type and intensity of emotions. We investigated facial emotion recognition in children with (subthreshold) ADHD and controls using a novel task with children’s faces of emotional expressions varying in type and intensity. We further investigated associations between emotion recognition accuracy and social and emotional problems in the ADHD group. 83 children displaying ADHD symptoms and 30 controls (6–12 years) completed the Morphed Facial Emotion Recognition Task (MFERT). The MFERT assesses emotion recognition accuracy on four emotions using five expression intensity levels. Teachers and parents rated social and emotional problems on the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Repeated measures analysis of variance revealed that the ADHD group showed poorer emotion recognition accuracy compared to controls across emotions (small effect). The significant group by expression intensity interaction (small effect) showed that the increase in accuracy with increasing expression intensity was smaller in the ADHD group compared to controls. Multiple regression analyses within the ADHD group showed that emotion recognition accuracy was inversely related to social and emotional problems, but not prosocial behavior. Not only children with an ADHD diagnosis, but also children with subthreshold ADHD experience impairments in facial emotion recognition. This impairment is predictive for social and emotional problems, which may suggest that emotion recognition may contribute to the development of social and emotional problems in these children.

Objective: To assess attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms in the classroom, most often teacher rating scales are used. However, clinical interviews and observations are recommended as gold standard assessment. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the validity of teacher rating scales. Method: Twenty-two studies ( N = 3,947 children) assessing ADHD symptoms using teacher rating scale and either semi-structured clinical interview or structured classroom observation were meta-analyzed. Results: Results showed convergent validity for rating scale scores, with the strongest correlations ( r = .55–.64) for validation against interviews, and for hyperactive–impulsive behavior. Divergent validity was confirmed for teacher ratings validated against interviews, whereas validated against observations this was confirmed for inattention only. Conclusion: Teacher rating scales appear a valid and time-efficient measure to assess classroom ADHD; although validated against semi-structured clinical interviews, there were only a few studies available. Low correlations between ratings and structured observations of inattention suggest that observations could add information above rating scales.

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.