Abstract
Objective The primary purpose of this study is to highlight trends in the prevalence of Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorders (ADHD) and Conduct Disorders (CD) between non-Hispanic White and non-Hispanic Black populations and identify potential diagnostic disparities between these groups.
Methods De-identified electronic health record data on the TriNetX platform of patients diagnosed with ADHD, CD, or both between January 2013 and May 2023 from 50 healthcare organizations in the US were used to investigate racial and sex disparities in the prevalence of ADHD and CD diagnoses.
Results With a cohort of 849,281 ADHD patients and 157,597 CD patients, non-Hispanic Whites were ∼26% more likely to receive ADHD diagnosis and ∼61% less likely to be diagnosed with CD than non-Hispanic Blacks. The mean age of diagnosis of ADHD was over 8 years higher for White patients than for Black patients, with a disproportionately higher number of White patients diagnosed in adulthood, compared to a comparatively negligible number of Blacks diagnosed with ADHD in the same age group. Additionally, Black females were the cohort least likely to be diagnosed with ADHD, while White females were the cohort least likely to be diagnosed with CD.
Conclusions Race disparities exist between Black and White populations, and sex disparities exist within each population. More information is needed to determine contributors to these differences, although implicit biases and systemic racism may be key contributing factors. Presenting evidence and increasing awareness of culturally relevant diagnoses can reduce unconscious bias and move toward more informed and objective psychiatric evaluations.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This retrospective study is exempt from informed consent. The data reviewed is a secondary analysis of existing data, does not involve intervention or interaction with human subjects, and is de-identified per the de-identification standard defined in Section 164.514(a) of the HIPAA Privacy Rule. The process by which the data is de-identified is attested to through a formal determination by a qualified expert as defined in Section 164.514(b)(1) of the HIPAA Privacy Rule. This formal determination by a qualified expert refreshed on December 2020.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data used in the present study is available through TriNetX at https://trinetx.com/
