An Epidemiological Study of Attention-deficits Hyperactivity Disorder and Learning Disabilities in a Rural Area.
- Author:
Ja Yun KIM
1
;
Dong Hyun AHN
;
Young Jeon SHIN
Author Information
1. Department of Neuropsychiatry, College of Medicine, Hanyang University, Seoul, Korea.
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
ADHD;
LD;
MR;
Prevalence rate;
Key informant method
- MeSH:
Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity;
Checklist;
Child;
Surveys and Questionnaires;
Diagnosis;
Disabled Children;
Epidemiologic Studies*;
Humans;
Intellectual Disability;
Learning Disorders*;
Learning*;
Mass Screening;
Parents;
Prevalence
- From:Journal of Korean Neuropsychiatric Association
1999;38(4):784-793
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVES: We atlempted to determine the prevalence rate of attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder, learning disorder, and mental retardation of elementary school children in a rural area, and to evaluate a cost, and time-efficient method for identifying of children with such disabilities. METHODS: We studied 1,256 children from 6 elementary schools in a rural aiea using used two-stage design. At the first step, we used the key informant and the total population survey methods for identifying children with disability. Teacher checklists were used as screening instruments in total population survey. And at the second step, child interview and KEDI-WISC were employed to make diagnoses. RESULTS: 1)The prevalence rate of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder(ADHD)was 1.99%. The prevalence rates of learning disorder(LD)and mental retardation(MR)were 0.40% and 2.23%, respectively. 2)The prevalence rate of MR was significantly higher in total population method compared with key informant method(3.29% vs. 1.23%) Other comparison of prevalence rates in two methods was not significantly different. Positive predictabilities of ADHD and learning disabilities by key informants were higher than by DBDRS and APRS, the checklists used in total population methods. 3)The probability of illness was much higher when the teacher and parents reported the problems of child concurrently. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence rate of ADHD in elementary school children in the rural area was 1. 99%. And the prevalence rates of LD and MR were 0.40% and 2.23%, respectively. Key informant method was more effective compared with total population survey in positive predictability and diagnostic concordance. In identifying children with disabilities, the combined data from teacher and a parent was most reliable.
