Hyper One Day, Calm the Next: Changes in ADHD

A diagnosis of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder may vanish over time

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a chronic condition, and if left untreated, it can set a child up for a lifetime of difficulties in learning and forming relationships. At least that is the assumption that has guided the popular approach to treating ADHD for decades. But new research suggests that ADHD might be much less persistent than previously thought.

A team led by Prudence Fisher and J. Blake Turner, both at Columbia University and the New York State Psychiatric Institute, reviewed the records of nearly 1,500 children from four studies that had used a standard diagnostic interview to screen for ADHD. They found that a majority of children who qualified for an initial diagnosis had lost their diagnosis by two years later.

ADHD has three subtypes: hyperactive, inattentive and both combined. More than half the children with the hyperactive and inattentive subtypes of the disorder had reverted to no ADHD at a two-year follow-up interview. Although the combined subtype was more persistent, between 18 and 35 percent of children in that group had also lost their diagnosis by the follow-up. Kids with many symptoms and significant impairment were just as likely to lose their diagnoses as children with milder forms of the disorder. Nor were the losses attributed to successful treatment.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


To Turner, the findings suggest that the current definition of ADHD would benefit from greater speci­ficity. If a disorder is, by definition, long-lasting, “then we are over­diagnosing ADHD,” Turner says. He and Fisher are advisers to the ongoing revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the handbook of guidelines for diagnosing psychiatric disorders. Turner recommends a cautious ap­proach to labeling and medicating kids whose behaviors, though irritating to many adults, are likely to be transient.

Joel Nigg, a professor of psychiatry at the Oregon Health and Science University who was not involved with the study, says that the finding reflects our evolving understanding of ADHD. Fifty years ago experts believed that most children “grew out of it.” In the 1970s and 1980s new studies ap­peared to show that ADHD is lifelong. The truth might lie so­mewhere in between. “The corrective here,” Nigg says, “may be that it’s chronic sometimes, a fluctuating condition in other cases, and it may be that some kids get better.”

SA Mind Vol 22 Issue 1This article was published with the title “Hyper One Day, Calm the Next: Changes in ADHD” in SA Mind Vol. 22 No. 1 (), p. 10
doi:10.1038/scientificamericanmind0311-10b

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe