A genetic investigation of sex bias in the prevalence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

Background Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) shows substantial heritability and is 2-7 times more common in males than females. We examined two putative genetic mechanisms underlying this sex bias: sex-specific heterogeneity and higher burden of risk in female cases. Methods We analyzed genome-wide autosomal common variants from the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium and iPSYCH Project (20,183 cases, 35,191 controls) and Swedish populationregister data (N=77,905 cases, N=1,874,637 population controls). Results Genetic correlation analyses using two methods suggested near complete sharing of common variant effects across sexes, with rg estimates close to 1. Analyses of population data, however, indicated that females with ADHD may be at especially high risk of certain comorbid developmental conditions (i.e. autism spectrum disorder and congenital malformations), potentially indicating some clinical and etiological heterogeneity. Polygenic risk score (PRS) analysis did not support a higher burden of ADHD common risk variants in female cases (OR=1.02 [0.98-1.06], p=0.28). In contrast, epidemiological sibling analyses revealed that the siblings of females with ADHD are at higher familial risk of ADHD than siblings of affected males (OR=1.14, [95% CI: 1.11-1.18], p=1.5E-15). Conclusions Overall, this study supports a greater familial burden of risk in females with ADHD and some clinical and etiological heterogeneity, based on epidemiological analyses. However, molecular genetic analyses suggest that autosomal common variants largely do not explain the sex bias in ADHD prevalence

Beurteilung von Kindern und Jugendlichen in Erziehungshilfen mit dem Kompetenzanalyseverfahren (KANN)

Zusammenfassung. Das Kompetenzanalyseverfahren (KANN) ist ein Fremdbeurteilungsverfahren für Eltern und pädagogische Fachkräfte zur Beurteilung beobachtbarer Kompetenzen von Kindern und Jugendlichen. In der Studie wird untersucht, ob, und wenn ja, inwiefern sich die Unterschiede zwischen den zwei Normstichproben (Schulnorm/Elternurteil vs. Kinder- und Jugendhilfe-Norm/Urteil pädagogischer Fachkräfte) durch (1) die Reliabilität des Messinstruments, (2) systematische Beurteilertendenzen und/oder (3) Kompetenzdefizite von Kindern und Jugendlichen in Erziehungshilfen erklären lassen. Hierzu wurden die Intra-/Interrater-Reliabilität und -Übereinstimmung an vier Stichproben aus dem Bereich der Erziehungshilfen analysiert: (A) Pädagoge/-in A – A (Test-Retest), n = 153; (B) Pädagoge/-in A – B, n = 169; (C) Mutter–Vater, n = 26 und (D) Pädagoge/-in – Elternteil, n = 136. Die Ergebnisse weisen auf eine gute Intra-/Interrater-Reliabilität und eine akzeptable Übereinstimmung im Urteil pädagogischer Fachkräfte hin. Zwischen unterschiedlichen Beurteilertypen (Pädagoge/-in – Elternteil), lässt sich eine deutlich niedrigere Interrater-Reliabilität und -Übereinstimmung feststellen. Der Vergleich des Elternurteils mit den beiden Normstichproben verdeutlicht die unterdurchschnittlichen KANN-Werte von Kindern und Jugendlichen in Erziehungshilfen. Eine Überschätzungstendenz der Eltern ist wahrscheinlich. </jats:p

Value of Clinical Information on Radiology Reports in Oncological Imaging

Radiological reporting errors have a direct negative impact on patient treatment. The purpose of this study was to investigate the contribution of clinical information (CI) in radiological reporting of oncological imaging and the dependence on the radiologists’ experience level (EL). Sixty-four patients with several types of carcinomas and twenty patients without tumors were enrolled. Computed tomography datasets acquired in primary or follow-up staging were independently analyzed by three radiologists (R) with different EL (R1: 15 years; R2: 10 years, R3: 1 year). Reading was initially performed without and 3 months later with CI. Overall, diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity for primary tumor detection increased significantly when receiving CI from 77% to 87%; p = 0.01 and 73% to 83%; p = 0.01, respectively. All radiologists benefitted from CI; R1: 85% vs. 92%, p = 0.15; R2: 77% vs. 83%, p = 0.33; R3: 70% vs. 86%, p = 0.02. Overall, diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity for detecting lymphogenous metastases increased from 80% to 85% (p = 0.13) and 42% to 56% (p = 0.13), for detection of hematogenous metastases from 85% to 86% (p = 0.61) and 46% to 60% (p = 0.15). Specificity remained stable (&gt;90%). Thus, CI in oncological imaging seems to be essential for correct radiological reporting, especially for residents, and should be available for the radiologist whenever possible.</jats:p

Value of Clinical Information on Radiology Reports in Oncological Imaging

Radiological reporting errors have a direct negative impact on patient treatment. The purpose of this study was to investigate the contribution of clinical information (CI) in radiological reporting of oncological imaging and the dependence on the radiologists&rsquo; experience level (EL). Sixty-four patients with several types of carcinomas and twenty patients without tumors were enrolled. Computed tomography datasets acquired in primary or follow-up staging were independently analyzed by three radiologists (R) with different EL (R1: 15 years; R2: 10 years, R3: 1 year). Reading was initially performed without and 3 months later with CI. Overall, diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity for primary tumor detection increased significantly when receiving CI from 77% to 87%; p = 0.01 and 73% to 83%; p = 0.01, respectively. All radiologists benefitted from CI; R1: 85% vs. 92%, p = 0.15; R2: 77% vs. 83%, p = 0.33; R3: 70% vs. 86%, p = 0.02. Overall, diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity for detecting lymphogenous metastases increased from 80% to 85% (p = 0.13) and 42% to 56% (p = 0.13), for detection of hematogenous metastases from 85% to 86% (p = 0.61) and 46% to 60% (p = 0.15). Specificity remained stable (&gt;90%). Thus, CI in oncological imaging seems to be essential for correct radiological reporting, especially for residents, and should be available for the radiologist whenever possible