Skip to main content

Table 2 Descriptive statistics of samples and of mathematical performance

From: A systematic review of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and mathematical ability: current findings and future implications

 

Participants descriptive statistics by group

Mathematical test descriptive statistics

Publication

Age range whole sample

N (mean age, SD age)

On medication during test

Test name

N (mean score, SD score)

P value

Quality rating

ADHD group

Non-ADHD group

ADHD group

Non-ADHD group

Antonini et al. [35]

7–11

49 (7.92, 1.11)C

45 (8.29, 1.34)

No

WIAT-II

97.06 (13.19)C

112.84 (18.7)

<0.0001 C

High

53 (8.36, 1.30)I

97.89 (13.79)I

<0.0001 I

August et al. [49]

6–11

79 (8.90, 1.17)

61 (8.70, 1.19)

NR

WRAT-R

92.80 (16)

93.5 (17)

>0.05

High

Barry et al. [32]

8–14

30 (11.10, 1.30)C

33 (11.24, 1.20)

No

MBA

1.52 (12.38)a

10.39 (12.77)a

<0.05

High

3 (11.10, 1.30)I

Bauermeister et al. [31]

6–11

140 [(32.1%)C; (17.1%)I; (2.8%)U] (8.31, 1.70)

NR (8.31, 1.70)

No

WPB-S

β = −0.33I

<0.001

High

Benedetto-Nasho et al. [25]

7–11

14 (9.55, 1.01)

15 (9.02, 1.14)

No

MCW

21.66 (12.13)P

47.32 (15.20)P

<0.001 P

High

52.53 (35.79)A

76.98 (18.04)A

<0.05 A

11.31 (10.92)E

36.79 (15.24)E

<0.001 E

Biederman et al. [44]

Adults

84 (38.90, 9)

142 (NR)

Yes

WRAT-R

101.8 (15.30)

108.5 (14.70)

<0.001

High

Biederman et al. [37]

6–17

128 (10.60, 3.00)b

109 (11.60, 3.70)b

Yes

WRAT-R

96.8 (17.40)b

111.30 (16.10)b

< 0.05 b

High

128 (14.40, 3.10)f

109 (15.2, 3.70)f

93.4 (18.30)f

109.50 (15.70)f

< 0.05 f

Biederman et al. [46]

6–17

100 (9.0, NR)Y

69 (8.90, NR)Y

NR

WRAT-R

96.70 (16.50)Y,b

111.70 (15.90)Y,b

<0.001

High

93.30 (18.30)Y,f

110.10 (16.20)Y,f

40 (14.40, NR)O

51 (15.20, NR)O

96.80 (19.00)O,b

111.10 (17.10)O,b

93.80 (18.20)O,f

108.40 (14.80)O,f

Biederman et al. [40]

6–18

140 (11.20, 3.40)

122 (12.20,

Yes

WRAT

95.50 (13.30)

106.20 (15.40)

<0.001

High

DuPaul et al. [5]

NR

95 (8.50, 1.20)C

53 (8.50, 1.10)

Yes

WJ-III

94.50 (12.70)

113.40 (10.30)

<0.001

High

31 (8.50, 1.20)I

10 (8.50, 1.20)H

Efron et al. [41]

6 – 8

93 (7.3, 0.4)C

212 (7.3, 0.4)

Yes

WRAT

90.2 (14.7)

102.8 (13.4)

<0.001

High

64 (7.3, 0.4)I

Subtypes = NS individually

22 (7.3, 0.4)H

β = –0.69

Faraone et al. [18]

6–17

93 (10.7, 3.10)b

120 (11.6, 3.70)b

Yes

WRAT-R

103.60 (14.40)b

111.30 (16.10)b

<0.05 b

Medium

83 (14.8, 3.20)f

109 (15.5, 3.70)f

98.80 (16.10)f

109.50 (15.70)f

<0.05 f

Faraone et al. [45]

6–17

485 (10.90, NR)Y

78 (10.80, NR)Y

NR

WRAT-R

92.70 (22.50)Y

110 (15.20)Y

<0.001

High

326 (10.90, NR)O

54 (10.80, NR)O

88 (25.00)O

111.8 (15.7)O

Frick et al. [26]

7–12

92 (9.50, NR)C

42 (10.60, NR)

No

BASIS

Underachievers: 14 % C, 7 % I

Underachievers:2%

<0.05 C

Medium

13 (9.50, NR)I

>0.05I

Gremillion et al. [36]

6–12

266 (9.72, 1.50)

207 (9.79, 1.48)

No

WIAT-II

40.12 (9.39)

43.09 (9.22)

<0.001

 

r = −0.27C

<0.001

High

r = −0.22I

<0.001

 

r = −0.28H

<0.001

 

Greven et al. [50]

NR

2191 (12, NR)MZ

NR

UNT, NNPT,CKT

Genetic correlation:

 

High

3930 (12, NR)DZ

ra = –0.41 (95 % CI: –0.47, –0.37)I

Significant

rc = 0.12 (95 % CI: –0.12, 0.35)I

NS

re = –0.20 (95 % CI: –0.23, –0.16)I

Significant

ra = –0.22 (95 % CI: –0.28, –0.17)H

Significant

rc = –0.27 (95 % CI: –0.44, –0.04)H

Significant

re = 0.00 (95 % CI: –0.04, 0.04)H

NS

Phenotypic correlation:

 

r = –0.26 (95 % CI: –0.28, –0.24)I

Significant

r = –0.18 (95 % CI: –0.20, –0.16)H

Significant

Hart et al. [19]

NR

271 (9.82, 0.99)MZ

NR

WJ-III

Genetic Covariance:

<0.05 I

High

159 (9.82, 0.99)DZ

covar = 0.36 (95 % CI: 0.23, 0.50)I

covar = 0.31 (95 % CI: 0.27, 0.43)H

Shared environment:

<0.05 H

covar = 0.90 (95 % CI: 0.84, 0.92)I

covar = 0.90 (95 % CI: 0.89, 0.92)H

Kaufmann & Nuerk [20]

8.8 –11.7

16 (10.20, 1.40)

16 (10.40, 1.30)

NR

NV-CNR

91.4 (10.16)

97.27 (2.55)

0.02

Medium

75 (24.15)

81.25 (17.08)

V-CNR

96.15 (4.58)

98.44 (2.54)

0.45

97.92 (3.02)

95.83 (11.39)

99.06 (2.02)

99.69 (1.25)

SMC

94.8 (5.61)

96.68 (3.12)

0.65

CMC

56.26 (20.20)

68.36 (18.45)

0.30

WMC

70.84 (25.97)

79.16 (17.87)

0.50

Kempton et al. [28]

6–12

15 (8.65, 1.53)

15 (8.81, 1.48)

No

WRAT

83.00 (10.92)

88.6 (15.72)

>0.05

High

Laasonen et al. [33]

18–55

30 (31.60, 8.17)

40 (37.15, 11.70)

No

WAIS-III

10.90 (3.17)

12.18 (2.40)

>0.05

Medium

Lamminmäki et al. [39]

NR

17 (8.67, 1.28)C

22 (8.92, 1.4)

Yes

WJ-III

Z-score:

–0.53 (0.83)

0.070

High

–1.33 (0.06)C

20 (9.78, 1.33)I

–0.88 (0.96)I

8 (8.60, 1.29)H

–0.50 (1.14)H

Lewandowski et al. [21]

10–13

17 (11, NR)C

27 (11, NR)

Yes

WJ-III

92.59 (14.71)

102.11 (13.42)

<0.05

High

7 (11, NR)I

3 (11, NR)H

Massetti et al. [38]

4–6b

85 (5.20, 0.70)C

130 (5.20, 0.08)

Yes

WJ-III

β = −2.55, z = −1.92C (refers to longitudinal performance of children exhibiting ADHD-C symptoms across all waves of assessment)

0.060C

High

14 (5.70, 0.50)I

β = −6.49, z = −3.34I (refers to overall longitudinal performance)

<0.001 I

12–14 f

26 (5.10, 0.80)H

β = 0.40, z = 0.18H (refers to overall longitudinal performance)

0.360H

β = −7.27, z = −3.61C,f (overall performance using DSM-IV number of impairment settings to define subtypes)

<0.001 C,f

ADHD-I & ADHD-Hf = NS

>0.05

Mayes & Calhoun [42]

6–16

724 (9, 2)

149 (9, 2)

Yes

WIAT, WIAT-II, WRAT-III

9 %d

4 %d

<0.001

Medium

Mealer et al. [22]

6–13

20 (8.90, 2.08)

20 (8.50, 1.93)

No

WISC - III

8.70 (3.52)

10.60 (2.7)

0.063

Medium

Papaioannou et al. [48]

6–11

 

835 (103.90, 17.60)

NR

STAA

Z-score:

Z-score:

0.003 C

High

 

24 (109.30, 17.10)C

−0.80 (1.11)C

08 (0.97)

 

31 (103.90, 16.40)H

−0.25 (0.99)H

>0.5H

33 (100.10, 16.40)I

−0.78 (1.07)I

0.0001 I

Penny et al. [29]

6–12

32 (8.65, 1.48)C

19 (8.40, 1.40)

No

WRAT-III

82.20 (17)

89.80 (15)

>0.05

Medium

1I

Roy-Byrne et al. [34]

18–64

46 (33.10, 9.70)

46 (39.50, 11.20)

No

WRAT-R

90.20 (19.90)

100.60 (23.90)

>0.05

High

Rucklidge et al. [23]

13–16

24 (14.68, 1.51)F

28 (15.31, 1.04)F

No

WRAT-III

96.33 (13.85)F

112.78 (12.34)F

<0.001

High

35 (14.80, 1.22) M

20 (14.8, 1.22)M

90.57 (15.697)M

108.20 (10.11)M

NR

Schachar & Tannock [30]

7–11

22 (9.20, 1.20)

16 (9.0, 1.4)

NR

WRAT-R

92.40 (9.00)

97.60 (13.80)

>0.05

Medium

Seidman et al. [24]

6–17

43 (NR, NR)

36 (NR, NR)

Yes

WRAT-R

95.70 (16.00)

107.60 (14.30)

<0.05

Medium

Thorell [27]

6–7

21 (6.30, 0.49)

124 (6.30, 0.49)

NR

NS

r = –0.28I

<0.001 I

Medium

r = –0.13H

>0.05H

Todd et al. [43]

7–17

149 (13.70, 3.00)C

731 (14.20, 3.10)

Yes

WRAT-III

87.3 (13.60)C

 

<0.001 C

High

243 (14.30, 3.00)I

89.40 (13.50)I

96.60 (13.40)

<0.001 I

31 (15.30, 3.10)H

95.50 (11.20)H

 

>0.05H

Zentall et al. [47]

7–15

107 (NR, NR)

121 (NR, NR)

NR

CAT

55.64 (2.97)

75.11 (3.00)

<0.001

High

TAT

F(2,223) = 58.5 (addition)

61.23 (NR)

<0.001

F(2,223) = 27.95 (subtraction)

32.60 (NR)

F(2,205) = 75.23 (multiplication)

91.79 (NR)

  1. Descriptives of samples and of mathematical performance. Numbers in bold highlight significant results
  2. N, Sample size; SD, Standard deviation; NR, Not reported; 95 % CI, 95 % confidence interval; Z-score, Represents achievement scores normalized and residualized for intelligence scores; ra, Genetic correlation; rc, Shared environmental correlation; re, Non-shared environmental correlation; covar, Covariance; C, Predominantly combined-type; I, Predominantly inattentive-type; H, Predominantly hyperactive-type; U, Unspecified; MZ, Monozygotic twin pairs; DZ, Dizygotic twin pairs; Y, Young; O, Old (adolescents); b, Baseline; f, Follow-up; F, Female; M, Male; a, The values demonstrate discrepancy between predicted achievement on the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test Composite [58] and actual math achievement on the Mini Battery of Achievement (MBA) test [59] with a positive score representing actual achievement above the predicted score as estimated by participant’s intellectual level, and a negative score representing actual achievement below the predicted score; P, Productivity (number of math problems attempted out of the total); A, Accuracy (percentage of problems answered correctly out of those attempted); E, Efficiency (number of correctly completed items out of total number of items available); d, Discrepancy between Intelligence quotient (IQ) and mathematics score
  3. NB: on average, ADHD children scored lower on the test than their intended IQ (<IQ of 104.8) and controls scored higher on the test than their intended IQ (>IQ of 97.5)
  4. Tests: WIAT-II, Wechsler Individual Achievement Test – Second Edition; WRAT-R, Wide Range Achievement Test-Revised; MBA, Woodcock-McGrew-Werder Mini-Battery of Achievement; WPB-S, Woodcock Psychoeducational Battery–Spanish; MCW, Math computational worksheet; WRAT, Wide Range Achievement Test; WJ-III, Woodcock-Johnson III achievement test; BASIS, Basic Achievement Skills Individual Screener; UNT, Understanding Number test; NNPT, Non-numerical Processes test; CKT, Computation and Knowledge test; BA, Basic arithmetic; NV-CNR, Core numerical representations – non-verbal magnitude representations; V-CNR, Core numerical representations – verbal representations; SMC, Simple mental calculation; CMC, Complex mental calculation; WMC, Written mental calculation; WAIS-III, Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale – Third edition; WJ-R, Woodcock-Johnson achievement test-Revised; WIAT-NO, Wechsler Individual Achievement Test Numerical Operations; WIAT, Wechsler Individual Achievement Test; WRAT-III, Wide Range Achievement Test-Third Edition; WISC-III, Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children – Third Edition; STAA , Screening test of arithmetic ability; PMS, Pupil Monitoring System; NS, Not specified; CAT, California Achievement Test; TAT, Timed Arithmetic Trial
Back to article page

BMC Medicine

ISSN: 1741-7015

Contact us