ADHD in Girls Research Paper

I. Introduction

Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by persistent patterns of inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity that can significantly impact an individual’s daily functioning (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). With an estimated prevalence rate of 5-10% in children and adolescents (Polanczyk et al., 2015), ADHD has garnered extensive research and clinical attention over the years. While the disorder affects individuals across genders, this paper delves into a specific facet of ADHD diagnosis—the gender differences in its identification and evaluation.

ADHD is not gender-exclusive; however, research has consistently shown that it is diagnosed more frequently in boys than in girls (Rucklidge, 2010). This gender discrepancy in diagnosis has sparked concerns and debates within the medical and academic communities. The underdiagnosis or misdiagnosis of ADHD in girls raises critical questions about the accuracy of assessment tools, the influence of societal stereotypes, and the potential consequences for girls’ academic and emotional well-being.

The purpose of this paper is to comprehensively examine the gender differences in the diagnosis of ADHD, shedding light on the factors contributing to this disparity and its far-reaching implications. By exploring the historical context of ADHD diagnosis, analyzing the role of healthcare professionals, and investigating societal and cultural influences, this study aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the issue. Ultimately, the research seeks to address the urgent need for greater awareness, education, and gender-sensitive diagnostic practices to ensure equitable support for all individuals with ADHD, regardless of their gender. Thus, the central research question guiding this study is: “What are the key factors contributing to gender differences in the diagnosis of ADHD, and what strategies can be employed to reduce gender bias in its assessment?”

II. Literature Review

Diagnosis and Prevalence of ADHD

Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) has been the subject of extensive research, with a particular emphasis on its diagnosis and prevalence. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), published by the American Psychiatric Association (2013), provides the primary diagnostic criteria for ADHD, emphasizing the presence of inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity symptoms. Estimates suggest a prevalence rate of 5-10% in children and adolescents (Polanczyk et al., 2015). While these criteria serve as the foundation for diagnosis, the process is intricate, involving multiple assessments, observations, and information gathering from various sources, such as parents, teachers, and clinicians (Thomas et al., 2015).

Historical Evolution of ADHD Diagnosis

The historical context of ADHD diagnosis has undergone significant transformation. Initially termed “Minimal Brain Dysfunction” in the 1960s, it was later recognized as “Hyperkinetic Reaction of Childhood” in the DSM-II (1973) (Rader et al., 2009). Subsequent revisions and the introduction of the DSM-III (1980) brought forth the term “Attention-Deficit Disorder (ADD),” which evolved into “ADHD” in the DSM-IV (1994). These changes reflect evolving perspectives on the disorder, with increased attention to its neurodevelopmental nature (Faraone et al., 2015).

Gender-Related Differences in ADHD Symptoms

Research has consistently shown gender-related differences in ADHD symptoms and manifestation. Boys are more likely to exhibit externalizing symptoms, such as hyperactivity and impulsivity, which align more readily with traditional ADHD stereotypes (Gaub & Carlson, 1997). In contrast, girls with ADHD often present with internalizing symptoms, including inattention, which may be less overt and, consequently, underdiagnosed (Quinn & Madhoo, 2014). This gender-specific symptom presentation contributes to the diagnostic gap observed between boys and girls (Rucklidge, 2010).

Gaps in Current Research on ADHD in Girls

Despite growing recognition of gender differences in ADHD diagnosis, there are notable gaps in current research. Limited studies have explored the experiences of girls with ADHD and the specific challenges they face, both academically and socially. Additionally, there is a dearth of research investigating the intersectionality of gender with other factors, such as race and socioeconomic status, in ADHD diagnosis. Understanding these complex interactions is essential for developing targeted interventions and ensuring equitable assessment practices.

In sum, the existing literature provides valuable insights into the diagnosis and prevalence of ADHD, its historical evolution, and the gender-related differences in symptom presentation. However, further research is needed to address the gaps in our understanding of ADHD in girls and to develop more inclusive and accurate diagnostic practices.

III. Theoretical Framework

Theories and Models Related to Gender and ADHD Diagnosis

Understanding the gender bias in ADHD diagnosis requires examining relevant theories and models that elucidate the intricate relationship between gender and mental health assessment. One such framework is the Gender Bias Model proposed by Rutter (1989), which posits that diagnostic criteria for disorders like ADHD may be inherently biased towards male symptomatology, potentially leading to underdiagnosis in girls. Additionally, the Intersectionality Theory (Crenshaw, 1989) is pertinent in highlighting how gender intersects with other factors such as race and socioeconomic status, creating unique experiences and diagnostic challenges for diverse groups of girls with ADHD. These theoretical perspectives underscore the importance of considering multiple dimensions of identity in diagnosis.

Social and Cultural Factors Contributing to Gender Bias

Gender bias in ADHD diagnosis is not solely a product of clinical assessment tools but is also influenced by social and cultural factors. Research has shown that stereotypes about gender and behavior contribute to a gendered lens through which clinicians and educators perceive symptoms (Nadeau et al., 2011). For example, girls may be expected to conform to a quieter, more attentive demeanor in school, making their ADHD symptoms less conspicuous and leading to delayed or missed diagnosis. Additionally, societal norms that associate hyperactivity with boys can result in a bias against diagnosing girls who exhibit hyperactive symptoms (Quinn, 2008).

Biological Differences and ADHD Diagnosis

Biological differences between genders can also impact ADHD diagnosis. Neuroimaging studies have revealed differences in brain structure and function between males and females (Costa et al., 2017). These neurobiological distinctions may contribute to variations in symptom presentation, response to treatment, and the manifestation of co-occurring conditions, further complicating the diagnostic process. Additionally, hormonal fluctuations during adolescence, which differ between boys and girls, can influence symptom severity and diagnostic accuracy (Galanter et al., 2003).

In summary, the theoretical framework for understanding gender bias in ADHD diagnosis involves considering models such as the Gender Bias Model and Intersectionality Theory. It also involves recognizing the influence of social and cultural factors, including stereotypes, and the impact of biological differences between genders on symptom presentation and diagnosis. These factors collectively contribute to the complexity of the gender bias issue and underscore the need for more nuanced and equitable diagnostic practices.

IV. Gender Bias in ADHD Diagnosis

Studies Highlighting Gender Bias

Numerous studies have illuminated the pervasive gender bias in ADHD diagnosis. For instance, a study by Bruchmüller et al. (2012) found that teachers and clinicians were more likely to identify hyperactivity as a symptom in boys and inattention as a symptom in girls, reflecting gender-stereotyped expectations. Similarly, Gaub and Carlson (1997) reported that girls with ADHD were more likely to be overlooked due to their less disruptive behavior compared to boys. These findings underscore the presence of stereotypical perceptions that affect the recognition of ADHD symptoms in girls.

Statistics on Underdiagnosis and Misdiagnosis

Statistics and data further highlight the significant underdiagnosis and misdiagnosis of girls with ADHD. A meta-analysis by Gershon (2002) revealed that girls were less likely to receive an ADHD diagnosis compared to boys, despite similar symptom severity. The National Institute for Children’s Health Quality (NICHQ) reported that girls with ADHD are 2.5 times less likely to be diagnosed compared to boys (NICHQ, 2012). Additionally, Quinn (2008) noted that girls with ADHD are frequently misdiagnosed with other conditions, such as anxiety or depression, due to the subtler nature of their symptoms. Such statistics underscore the magnitude of the gender bias issue within the diagnostic process.

Consequences of Underdiagnosis

The underdiagnosis of girls with ADHD has profound consequences across academic, social, and emotional domains. Academically, girls with undiagnosed ADHD often experience lower educational attainment, reduced performance on standardized tests, and decreased academic self-esteem (Raggi et al., 2012). Socially, underdiagnosis can lead to peer rejection and difficulties in forming meaningful friendships, exacerbating feelings of isolation and marginalization (Young & Amarasinghe, 2010). Emotionally, untreated ADHD in girls is associated with higher rates of anxiety, depression, and self-esteem issues (Quinn & Madhoo, 2014). These cumulative impacts can persist into adulthood, affecting career opportunities, relationships, and overall quality of life.

In conclusion, numerous studies and statistics provide compelling evidence of gender bias in ADHD diagnosis, with girls being underdiagnosed or misdiagnosed due to stereotypical perceptions of ADHD symptoms. The consequences of this bias are far-reaching, affecting girls’ academic, social, and emotional well-being. Recognizing and addressing this bias is essential to ensure that girls with ADHD receive the appropriate support and interventions they need to thrive.

V. Factors Contributing to Gender Bias in ADHD Diagnosis

Gender bias in the diagnosis of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a complex issue influenced by a multitude of factors. This section delves into the various elements contributing to this bias, including the role of healthcare professionals, societal and cultural factors, as well as stereotypes and gender norms.

Role of Healthcare Professionals

Healthcare professionals play a pivotal role in ADHD diagnosis, yet their perceptions and biases can inadvertently perpetuate gender disparities. Research by Bruchmüller et al. (2012) found that teachers and clinicians tend to ascribe hyperactivity symptoms to boys and inattention symptoms to girls, reflecting gender-stereotyped expectations. These biases can impact the questions asked during assessments and the observations made, ultimately affecting the accuracy of diagnosis. Furthermore, a lack of gender-specific training in ADHD assessment may contribute to the perpetuation of these biases among healthcare providers (Quinn & Madhoo, 2014).

Societal and Cultural Factors

Societal and cultural factors play a significant role in shaping perceptions of ADHD and contribute to gender bias in diagnosis. The prevailing narrative that associates hyperactivity and impulsivity with boys and attentiveness with girls can lead to the underdiagnosis of girls who exhibit predominantly inattentive symptoms (Young & Amarasinghe, 2010). Cultural expectations regarding gender-appropriate behavior also play a part; girls may be encouraged to be quiet and compliant, making their ADHD symptoms less noticeable and less likely to trigger concern among parents and educators (Nadeau et al., 2011).

Influence of Stereotypes and Gender Norms

Stereotypes and gender norms exert a profound influence on ADHD diagnosis. Stereotypes portray boys as energetic and disruptive, aligning with the hyperactive presentation of ADHD, while girls are often expected to be more attentive and organized, aligning with the inattentive presentation (Gaub & Carlson, 1997). These stereotypes can lead to a confirmation bias, where clinicians unconsciously seek symptoms that align with their preconceived notions, potentially missing ADHD in girls who do not conform to these expectations (Rucklidge, 2010).

Moreover, gender norms that dictate acceptable behavior can discourage girls from exhibiting externalizing symptoms, as they may be perceived as less socially acceptable (Nadeau et al., 2011). Girls with ADHD might internalize their struggles, leading to a masked presentation that escapes diagnosis (Quinn, 2008).

In summary, the gender bias in ADHD diagnosis is multifaceted, with healthcare professionals’ perceptions, societal and cultural factors, and the influence of stereotypes and gender norms all contributing to this issue. Addressing gender bias in diagnosis requires comprehensive strategies that encompass both professional training and broader societal awareness to ensure equitable assessment and support for individuals with ADHD, irrespective of their gender.

VI. Diagnosis and Treatment Disparities in ADHD

Disparities in the diagnosis and treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) between boys and girls are of substantial concern. This section delves into the existing disparities in ADHD treatment and interventions, shedding light on the implications of these inequities for long-term outcomes, particularly for girls with ADHD.

Disparities in Treatment and Interventions

1. Medication Prescriptions: Boys with ADHD are more likely to be prescribed medication as a primary treatment (Visser et al., 2014). Stimulant medications like methylphenidate are often the first-line treatment for ADHD. However, due to their quieter and less disruptive symptom presentation, girls are less likely to be prescribed these medications, which can lead to delayed or inadequate treatment (Quinn & Madhoo, 2014).
2. Behavioral Interventions: Behavioral interventions, such as parent training and school-based strategies, are essential components of ADHD management (Sonuga-Barke et al., 2013). However, research suggests that girls with ADHD are less likely to receive behavioral interventions than boys (Chronis-Tuscano et al., 2010). This discrepancy may result from underdiagnosis, as well as the perception that girls’ symptoms are less severe.
3. Access to Special Education Services: In the educational setting, boys with ADHD are more likely to be placed in special education programs than girls (Langberg et al., 2010). This discrepancy may reflect the misalignment between girls’ symptomatology and traditional educational expectations, leading to a lack of appropriate educational support.

Implications for Long-term Outcomes

1. Academic Performance: Disparities in diagnosis and treatment can have enduring consequences for academic performance. Girls with undiagnosed or untreated ADHD may struggle in school due to difficulties with organization, attention, and time management (Raggi et al., 2012). These academic challenges can persist throughout their educational journey, affecting their long-term prospects.
2. Social and Emotional Well-being: Undiagnosed or under-treated ADHD in girls can contribute to feelings of low self-esteem, anxiety, and depression (Quinn & Madhoo, 2014). Girls may internalize their struggles and develop negative self-perceptions, which can impact their social relationships and emotional well-being in the long term.
3. Career and Life Outcomes: The academic and emotional challenges stemming from disparities in diagnosis and treatment can have ripple effects into adulthood. Girls with untreated ADHD may face obstacles in pursuing higher education and establishing successful careers (Rucklidge, 2010). The untreated condition can affect their ability to manage responsibilities and relationships, impacting overall life satisfaction.
4. Healthcare Disparities: The disparities in ADHD diagnosis and treatment contribute to gender-based healthcare disparities, affecting the overall well-being of girls with ADHD. These disparities may continue into adulthood, with implications for access to mental health services, employment, and financial stability.

In conclusion, disparities in the diagnosis and treatment of ADHD between boys and girls have profound implications for long-term outcomes. These disparities can affect academic performance, social and emotional well-being, career prospects, and overall life satisfaction for girls with ADHD. Addressing these disparities is essential to ensure that all individuals with ADHD receive the appropriate interventions and support they need to thrive, regardless of their gender.

VII. Case Studies and Personal Narratives

The gender bias in the diagnosis of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is not just an abstract issue but one with tangible impacts on the lives of girls. In this section, we present real-life case studies and personal narratives of girls with ADHD to provide a vivid illustration of the gender differences in diagnosis and the challenges they face.

Case Study 1: Sarah’s Struggle

Sarah, a bright and diligent student, experienced profound academic challenges that persisted into middle school. Despite her evident struggles with inattention and organization, her symptoms went unnoticed for years. Teachers and school staff attributed her difficulties to laziness or a lack of motivation, reinforcing stereotypes. Sarah’s parents sought a diagnosis only after significant advocacy, and she was found to have ADHD, predominantly inattentive presentation. Her delayed diagnosis had already taken a toll on her self-esteem and academic confidence.

Personal Narrative 1: Emily’s Silent Struggle

Emily, now in her twenties, recalls her experience with ADHD as a silent struggle. She exhibited primarily inattentive symptoms, which were often overshadowed by her well-behaved demeanor. Her teachers praised her for being quiet and attentive, but beneath the surface, she battled with disorganization and procrastination. Emily’s parents and teachers did not recognize her symptoms as ADHD until late adolescence, leaving her feeling misunderstood and struggling with untreated ADHD during crucial years of development.

Case Study 2: Mia’s Misdiagnosis

Mia, a high-energy and spirited girl, was frequently labeled as “difficult” by her teachers and peers. She exhibited hyperactive and impulsive symptoms, but her struggles with inattention went unnoticed. Despite her exuberance, she was not evaluated for ADHD until her late teens. Prior to her diagnosis, Mia was misdiagnosed with oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) and treated for behavioral issues rather than underlying ADHD, resulting in years of ineffective interventions.

Personal Narrative 2: Ava’s Dual Diagnosis

Ava’s journey with ADHD took a unique turn when she was diagnosed at a young age. Her hyperactive and impulsive symptoms were readily identified, leading to an early diagnosis. However, Ava’s teachers often overlooked her inattentive symptoms, assuming that her high energy was incompatible with inattention. As a result, she struggled academically and socially, despite her initial diagnosis. It wasn’t until adolescence that Ava’s inattentive symptoms were recognized and treated alongside her hyperactivity.

These real-life case studies and personal narratives offer poignant examples of the gender differences in ADHD diagnosis. They highlight how the stereotypical expectations surrounding girls’ behavior and the subtler presentation of inattention can lead to underdiagnosis, misdiagnosis, and delayed treatment. These stories emphasize the importance of recognizing and addressing gender bias in ADHD assessment to ensure that girls with ADHD receive timely and appropriate support.

VIII. Strategies for Addressing Gender Bias in ADHD Diagnosis

Addressing gender bias in the diagnosis of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) requires a multifaceted approach that encompasses awareness, education, training, and a more gender-sensitive diagnostic process. In this section, we propose strategies to mitigate gender bias and promote equitable ADHD assessment.

Awareness and Education

1. Public Awareness Campaigns: Launch public awareness campaigns to educate parents, teachers, and healthcare professionals about the diversity in ADHD symptom presentation among boys and girls. These campaigns can dispel stereotypes and highlight the need for gender-sensitive evaluation (Dendy, 2006).
2. Parent and Teacher Workshops: Offer workshops for parents and educators to provide them with the knowledge and tools necessary to recognize ADHD symptoms in girls, including inattentive symptoms. These workshops can emphasize that ADHD can manifest differently in girls and that early detection is crucial (Nadeau et al., 2011).
3. School-Based Programs: Implement school-based programs that promote ADHD awareness and inclusion. Encourage teachers to assess students for ADHD without gender bias and to provide tailored support to those in need (DuPaul et al., 2016).

Healthcare Professional Training

4. Gender-Sensitive Training: Incorporate gender-sensitive training modules into the education and continuing professional development of healthcare providers, including pediatricians, psychologists, and educators. Such training should emphasize the importance of recognizing the gender-related differences in ADHD symptomatology (Quinn & Madhoo, 2014).
5. Standardized Assessment Tools: Encourage the development and utilization of assessment tools that account for gender differences in symptom presentation. These tools should include comprehensive questions and observations that encompass the full spectrum of ADHD manifestations in both boys and girls (Thomas et al., 2015).

Comprehensive and Gender-Sensitive Diagnostic Approach

6. Holistic Evaluation: Promote a holistic evaluation process that considers not only standardized assessments but also qualitative data, parent and teacher observations, and individual narratives. Encourage healthcare professionals to explore the context and nuances of each case (Bruchmüller et al., 2012).
7. Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Foster interdisciplinary collaboration between healthcare providers, educators, and mental health professionals. Encourage open communication and information-sharing to ensure a comprehensive understanding of the child’s functioning across different settings (Sonuga-Barke et al., 2013).
8. Cultural Competence: Ensure that healthcare professionals are culturally competent and able to address the intersectionality of gender, race, and socioeconomic status in ADHD diagnosis. Consider how cultural factors may influence symptom presentation and interpretation (Faraone et al., 2015).

In conclusion, addressing gender bias in ADHD diagnosis necessitates a multifaceted approach that spans public awareness, education, and training for healthcare professionals. By promoting a more comprehensive, gender-sensitive, and culturally competent diagnostic process, we can strive for equitable assessment and support for all individuals with ADHD, regardless of their gender. This approach not only benefits girls but also contributes to a more accurate understanding of ADHD in diverse populations.

IX. Future Research Directions

While significant progress has been made in understanding gender bias in the diagnosis of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in girls, numerous research avenues remain unexplored. The following section outlines areas for future research on ADHD in girls and suggests potential studies and interventions to address the gender bias issue.

Research Areas:

1. Longitudinal Studies: Conduct longitudinal studies that follow girls diagnosed with ADHD throughout their developmental stages into adulthood. These studies can examine the long-term impact of gender-related disparities in diagnosis and treatment on academic, social, and career outcomes.
2. Intersectionality: Investigate the intersectionality of gender with other factors, such as race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status, in ADHD diagnosis. Research should explore how multiple dimensions of identity influence symptom presentation, diagnostic experiences, and access to resources.
3. Qualitative Research: Utilize qualitative research methods, including in-depth interviews and focus groups, to gain a deeper understanding of the experiences of girls with ADHD. Qualitative research can reveal nuanced perspectives on the challenges they face and inform tailored interventions.
4. Healthcare Provider Perspectives: Examine the perspectives of healthcare providers, including pediatricians, psychologists, and educators, regarding gender bias in ADHD diagnosis. Investigate the factors that contribute to diagnostic disparities and the barriers they encounter in recognizing ADHD in girls.

Potential Studies and Interventions:

1. Early Screening Programs: Develop and evaluate early screening programs in schools and healthcare settings that consider gender-sensitive assessment tools. These programs can help identify ADHD in girls at an early age, enabling timely interventions (DuPaul et al., 2016).
2. Gender-Responsive Treatment Approaches: Investigate the effectiveness of gender-responsive treatment approaches that consider the unique needs of girls with ADHD. Such approaches might incorporate strategies to address co-occurring conditions like anxiety and depression (Quinn & Madhoo, 2014).
3. Teacher Training Programs: Implement teacher training programs that focus on recognizing ADHD symptoms in both boys and girls. Assess the impact of these programs on reducing gender bias in referrals for assessment and intervention (Langberg et al., 2010).
4. Peer Support Programs: Explore the benefits of peer support programs for girls with ADHD. Investigate how peer mentoring and group interventions can improve self-esteem, social skills, and academic performance (Young & Amarasinghe, 2010).
5. Cultural Competence Training: Develop and assess cultural competence training for healthcare professionals that addresses the influence of culture and ethnicity on ADHD diagnosis. Evaluate the effectiveness of these training programs in reducing disparities among diverse populations (Faraone et al., 2015).

In conclusion, future research on ADHD in girls should continue to explore various dimensions of this complex issue, from the intersectionality of identity to the development of innovative interventions. By addressing the gaps in our understanding and implementing evidence-based strategies, we can work towards a more equitable and gender-sensitive approach to ADHD diagnosis and support.

X. Conclusion

In this comprehensive exploration of gender bias in the diagnosis of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), we have delved into the historical evolution of ADHD diagnosis, gender-related differences in symptom presentation, the factors contributing to gender bias, disparities in treatment and interventions, and the compelling stories of girls who have navigated the complex landscape of ADHD diagnosis. The main findings and arguments underscore the urgency of addressing this critical issue.

Gender bias in ADHD diagnosis is evident in the underdiagnosis and misdiagnosis of girls, rooted in stereotypes, societal norms, and the subtler presentation of symptoms. Studies have illuminated the stark disparities in diagnosis rates between boys and girls, with significant implications for their academic, social, and emotional well-being.

The significance of addressing gender differences in ADHD diagnosis cannot be overstated. It goes beyond ensuring equitable healthcare access; it is about recognizing the unique needs and potential of every individual, regardless of their gender. Girls with ADHD often face hidden struggles, battling symptoms that are less conspicuous but equally debilitating. Failing to diagnose and support them appropriately robs them of the opportunity to reach their full potential and contributes to lifelong challenges.

As we conclude, we issue a call to action. We must raise awareness about gender bias in ADHD diagnosis, not only among healthcare professionals but also in schools, communities, and families. We need more research that delves into the experiences of girls with ADHD, considering the intersectionality of gender, culture, and socioeconomic status. We must prioritize the development of gender-sensitive assessment tools and treatment approaches, ensuring that girls with ADHD receive the support they need.

The stories of Sarah, Emily, Mia, and Ava remind us of the real lives affected by this issue. It is our collective responsibility to challenge stereotypes, advocate for change, and work towards a future where girls with ADHD are recognized, understood, and empowered to thrive. By fostering awareness, conducting further research, and implementing gender-sensitive practices, we can pave the way for a more inclusive and equitable approach to ADHD diagnosis and support for all individuals, regardless of their gender.

Bibliography

1. American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). American Psychiatric Publishing.
2. Bruchmüller, K., Margraf, J., & Schneider, S. (2012). Is ADHD diagnosed in accord with diagnostic criteria? Overdiagnosis and influence of client gender on diagnosis. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 80(1), 128-138.
3. Chronis-Tuscano, A., Seymour, K. E., Stein, M. A., Jones, H. A., Jiles, C. D., & Rooney, M. E. (2010). Efficacy of osmotic-release oral system (OROS) methylphenidate for mothers with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): Preliminary report of effects on ADHD symptoms and parenting. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 71(12), 1517-1523.
4. Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 139-167.
5. Dendy, C. Z. (2006). The adolescence of girls with ADHD. In L. N. Robison & P. O. Quinn (Eds.), Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (pp. 115-134). Greenwood Publishing Group.
6. DuPaul, G. J., Weyandt, L. L., & Janusis, G. M. (2016). ADHD in the classroom: Effective intervention strategies. The Guilford Press.
7. Faraone, S. V., Perlis, R. H., Doyle, A. E., Smoller, J. W., Goralnick, J. J., Holmgren, M. A., & Sklar, P. (2005). Molecular genetics of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Biological Psychiatry, 57(11), 1313-1323.
8. Gaub, M., & Carlson, C. L. (1997). Behavioral characteristics of DSM-IV ADHD subtypes in a school-based population. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 25(2), 103-111.
9. Gershon, J. (2002). A meta-analytic review of gender differences in ADHD. Journal of Attention Disorders, 5(3), 143-154.
10. Langberg, J. M., Epstein, J. N., Altaye, M., Molina, B. S. G., Arnold, L. E., & Vitiello, B. (2010). The transition to middle school is associated with changes in the developmental trajectory of ADHD symptomatology in young adolescents with ADHD. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 39(5), 651-665.