首页> 外文期刊>Journal of child psychology and psychiatry >Practitioner Review: What have we learnt about the causes of ADHD?
【24h】

Practitioner Review: What have we learnt about the causes of ADHD?

机译:从业者评论:我们对多动症的病因学到了什么?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Background:? Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and its possible causes still attract controversy. Genes, pre and perinatal risks, psychosocial factors and environmental toxins have all been considered as potential risk factors. Method:? This review (focussing on literature published since 1997, selected from a search of PubMed) critically considers putative risk factors with a focus on genetics and selected environmental risks, examines their relationships with ADHD and discusses the likelihood that these risks are causal as well as some of the main implications. Results:? No single risk factor explains ADHD. Both inherited and noninherited factors contribute and their effects are interdependent. ADHD is familial and heritable. Research into the inherited and molecular genetic contributions to ADHD suggest an important overlap with other neurodevelopmental problems, notably, autism spectrum disorders. Having a biological relative with ADHD, large, rare copy number variants, some small effect size candidate gene variants, extreme early adversity, pre and postnatal exposure to lead and low birth weight/prematurity have been most consistently found as risk factors, but none are yet known to be definitely causal. There is a large literature documenting associations between ADHD and a wide variety of putative environmental risks that can, at present, only be regarded as correlates. Findings from research designs that go beyond simply testing for association are beginning to contest the robustness of some environmental exposures previously thought to be ADHD risk factors. Conclusions:? The genetic risks implicated in ADHD generally tend to have small effect sizes or be rare and often increase risk of many other types of psychopathology. Thus, they cannot be used for prediction, genetic testing or diagnostic purposes beyond what is predicted by a family history. There is a need to consider the possibility of parents and siblings being similarly affected and how this might impact on engagement with families, influence interventions and require integration with adult services. Genetic contributions to disorder do not necessarily mean that medications are the treatment of choice. We also consider how findings might influence the conceptualisation of ADHD, public health policy implications and why it is unhelpful and incorrect to dichotomise genetic/biological and environmental explanations. It is essential that practitioners can interpret genetic and aetiological research findings and impart informed explanations to families.
机译:背景:?注意缺陷多动障碍(ADHD)及其可能的原因仍然引起争议。基因,产前和围产期风险,社会心理因素和环境毒素都被认为是潜在的风险因素。方法:?这篇综述(侧重于1997年以来发表的文献,选自PubMed的搜索)严格地考虑了以遗传学和选定环境风险为重点的推定风险因素,研究了它们与ADHD的关系,并讨论了这些风险是因果关系的可能性以及一些主要含义。结果:?没有单一的危险因素可以解释多动症。遗传因素和非遗传因素均起作用,其作用是相互依存的。多动症是家族性和遗传性的。对多动症的遗传和分子遗传贡献的研究表明与其他神经发育问题,特别是自闭症谱系障碍有重要的重叠。与多动症有亲戚关系的是,最大,最常见的发现是ADHD的生物学亲缘关系,大的,罕见的拷贝数变异,一些效应大小较小的候选基因变异,极端的早期逆境,出生前和出生后铅暴露以及低出生体重/早产。但已知绝对是因果关系。有大量文献记载了多动症与各种假定的环境风险之间的关联,目前只能将其视为关联。研究设计中的发现超出了简单的关联测试,开始与以前被认为是ADHD危险因素的某些环境暴露的鲁棒性相抗衡。结论:?涉及多动症的遗传风险通常趋向于具有较小的效应大小或罕见,并且经常增加许多其他类型的精神病理学风险。因此,它们不能用于家族史预测之外的预测,基因测试或诊断目的。有必要考虑父母和兄弟姐妹受到类似影响的可能性,以及这如何影响与家庭的交往,影响干预措施并要求与成人服务相结合。遗传对疾病的贡献并不一定意味着药物是治疗的选择。我们还考虑发现如何影响多动症的概念化,公共卫生政策的含义,以及为什么将遗传/生物学和环境解释一分为二是无益和不正确的。从业人员必须能够解释遗传学和病因学研究结果,并向家庭提供有根据的解释。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号