Tracking Procedures and Attrition Containment in a Long‐Term Follow‐Up of a Community‐Based ADHD Sample

Hartsough, Carolyn S.; Babinski, Leslie M.; Lambert, Nadine M.

doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.1996.tb01462.x

Cited by 20 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The pool of subjects interviewed during the adult followup initiated in 1992 ranged in age from 23 to 30 years, with an average age of 26n6 years. Moreover, it was demonstrated that there had not been selective attrition and that the reconstituted adult sample closely resembled the original larger childhood sample in childhood symptoms and background characteristics (Hartsough et al, 1996).…”

Section: Methods Subjectsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Local enforcement agencies in California have been required by law to report such arrests to the Bureau since 1973. These reports were, therefore, likely to be accurate representations of the current arrest-status of these adult subjects (Hartsough et al, 1996). The rap sheets yielded arrest records for 53 (23 %) of the 230 male subjects and 6 (8 %) of the female subjects in this sample.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Childhood Conduct Problems, Hyperactivity‐impulsivity, and Inattention as Predictors of Adult Criminal Activity

Babinski

Hartsough

Lambert

1999

Child Psychology Psychiatry

Self Cite

273

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study reconsiders the relationship of childhood Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and childhood conduct problems with adult criminal activity by clarifying the role of the cardinal behaviors associated with the DSM-IV ADHD subtypes (inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity). Since their childhood (average age 9 years), 230 male and 75 female subjects have been followed prospectively and were interviewed as young adults (average age 26 at follow-up). Early childhood behavior ratings by parents and teachers were examined to determine the role of conduct problems, hyperactivity-impulsivity, and inattention in predicting adult criminal involvement as measured by both official arrest records and self-report. Results show that both hyperactivity-impulsivity and early conduct problems independently, as well as jointly, predict a greater likelihood of having an arrest record for males, but not for females. For male subjects with 10 or more self-reported crimes, both early conduct problems and hyperactivity-impulsivity were significant predictors, both alone and in combination. Therefore, it appears that predominantly the symptoms of hyperactivity-impulsivity, but not inattention, contribute to the risk for criminal involvement over and above the risk associated with early conduct problems alone.

show abstract

Section: Methods Subjectsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Childhood Conduct Problems, Hyperactivity‐impulsivity, and Inattention as Predictors of Adult Criminal Activity

Babinski

Hartsough

Lambert

1999

Child Psychology Psychiatry

Self Cite

273

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Interviews with fieldwork experts in US survey research centers20 and descriptions of extended effort in the literature1,3,16,19,37 informed our definition of “hard to reach.” Because interviewers shared files and there was no strict order for the methods used to track respondents, we did not attempt to evaluate each tracking method separately. Instead, we used a summary measure.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effects of Failing to Include Hard-to-Reach Respondents in Longitudinal Surveys

Odierna

Schmidt

2009

Am J Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives-We sought to determine whether failure to locate hard-to-reach respondents in longitudinal studies causes biased and inaccurate study results.Methods-We performed a nonresponse simulation in a survey of 498 low-income women who received cash aid in a California county. Our simulation was based on a previously published analysis that found that women without children who applied for General Assistance experienced more violence than did women with children who applied for Temporary Assistance to Needy Families. We compared hard-to-reach respondents whom we reinterviewed only after extended follow-up effort 12 months after baseline with other respondents. We then removed these hard-to-reach respondents from our analysis.Results-Other than having a greater prevalence of substance dependence (14% vs 6%), there were no significant differences between hard-and easy-to-reach respondents. However, excluding the hard to reach would have decreased response rates from 89% to 71% and nullified the findings, a result that did not stem primarily from reduced statistical power.Conclusions-The effects of failure to retain hard-to-reach respondents are not predicable based on respondent characteristics. Retention of these respondents should be a priority in public health research.Respondents who participate in all phases of longitudinal studies are likely to differ from those who are lost to follow-up. [1][2][3][4][5] Differential attrition, or nonrandom loss of respondents, can lead to bias in a study's findings by changing the composition of the sample so that it no longer represents the study population, especially when response rates are low and there are large differences between responders and nonresponders. 6 Attrition also reduces sample sizes, contributing to the risk of type 2 error by decreasing statistical power to detect effects. 7 Requests for reprints should be sent to Donna H. Odierna, Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University of California, San Francisco, 3333 California St, Suite 420, San Francisco, CA 94118 (donna.odierna@ucsf.edu or dodierna@gmail.com).. Contributors D. H. Odierna developed the concept for the article, carried out the statistical analysis, and wrote versions of the article. L. A. Schmidt contributed substantially to the overall themes, writing, and editing at each stage; she also originated the Welfare Client Longitudinal Study (WCLS) and supervised all aspects of its implementation. Human Participant ProtectionThe survey design, survey instrument, and consent documents were approved by the institutional review boards at the University of California, San Francisco, and the Public Health Institute. Participants were protected by a federal Certificate of Confidentiality from the US Department of Health and Human Services. This secondary analysis was conducted after appropriate review and exemption by the institutional review board at the University of California, Berkeley. NIH Public Access Author ManuscriptAm J Public Health. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2010 August ...

show abstract

“…Finally, there is the issue of the source of the samples of children with ADHD studied in these investigations. With one exception in the published literature (i.e., Hartsough, Babinski, & Lambert, 1996), samples of ADHD youths are recruited from clinical sites. Because community-based ADHD youths are likely to reveal a less-severe form of ADHD (August, Realmuto, Crosby, & MacDonald, 1995), the association between childhood stimulant medication and later drug abuse may not be the same as among clinic-referred ADHD youths.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Prospective Examination of the Association of Stimulant Medication History and Drug Use Outcomes among Community Samples of ADHD Youths

Winters

Lee

Botzet

et al. 2011

Journal of Child & Adolescent Substance Abuse

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A continuing debate in the child psychopathology literature is the extent to which pharmacotherapy for children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), in particular stimulant treatment, confers a risk of subsequent drug abuse. If stimulant treatment for ADHD contributes to drug abuse, then the risk versus therapeutic benefits of such treatment is greatly affected. We have prospectively followed an ADHD sample (N = 149; 81% males) for approximately 15 years, beginning at childhood (ages 8 to 10 years) and continuing until the sample has reached young adulthood (ages 22 to 24 years). The sample was originally recruited via an epidemiologically derived community procedure, and all youths were diagnosed with ADHD during childhood. We report on the association of childhood psychostimulant medication and subsequent substance use disorders and tobacco use. The substance use outcomes were based on data collected at three time points when the sample was in late adolescence and young adulthood (age range approximately 18 to 22 years old). We did not find evidence to support that childhood treatment with stimulant medication, including the course of stimulant medication, was associated with any change in risk for adolescent or young adulthood substance use disorders and tobacco use. These results from a community-based sample extend the growing body of literature based on clinically derived samples indicating that stimulant treatment does not create a significant risk for subsequent substance use disorders.

show abstract

Tracking Procedures and Attrition Containment in a Long‐Term Follow‐Up of a Community‐Based ADHD Sample

Cited by 20 publications

References 21 publications

Childhood Conduct Problems, Hyperactivity‐impulsivity, and Inattention as Predictors of Adult Criminal Activity

Childhood Conduct Problems, Hyperactivity‐impulsivity, and Inattention as Predictors of Adult Criminal Activity

The Effects of Failing to Include Hard-to-Reach Respondents in Longitudinal Surveys

A Prospective Examination of the Association of Stimulant Medication History and Drug Use Outcomes among Community Samples of ADHD Youths

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About