Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Correction to: Journal of Neural Transmission (2021) 128:1045–1063 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00702-021-02318-y
Due to an administrative error, 73 individuals were wrongfully assigned to the Simulation Group. Correction of this error consequently reduced its sample size from 242 to 169 individuals.
This did not affect the development of the ADHD Credibility Index (ACI). However, it resulted in an underestimation of the index’ classification accuracy in its initial validation.
The corrected demographic data of the Simulation Group (see amended Table 1) differed from those of the other experimental groups as described in the original publication. Participants of this group were still significantly younger than participants in the ADHD Groups (credible: z = 7.357, adjusted p < 0.01; non-credible: z = 3.819, adjusted p < 0.01) and Control Groups (credible: z = 20.681, adjusted p < 0.01; overreporting: z = 3.557, adjusted p < 0.01). The gender distribution in this group also differed from the Credible (χ2 (1) = 42.518, p < 0.01) and Overreporting Control Groups (χ2 (1) = 20.289, p < 0.01) as well as the ADHD Groups (credible: χ2 (1) = 16.176, p < 0.01; non-credible: χ2 (1) = 13.327, p = 0.01). In terms of education, instructed simulators differed from credible participants in the Control Group (z = − 7.611, adjusted p < 0.01) and the ADHD Group (z = − 3.660, adjusted p < 0.01), but not from overreporting controls (z = 1.864, adjusted p = 0.623) or non-credible patients with ADHD (z = 0.014, adjusted p = 1.00).
Correcting the Simulation Group further required the revision of Tables 2, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11. With the exception of the following findings, the pattern of results remained unchanged. The validity indicators under study showed overall higher sensitivity rates and larger effect sizes than previously reported. Rather than the small effect described in the original publication, the ACI yielded a large effect for the comparison of instructed simulators and credible adults with ADHD (d = 1.29, 95% CI [0.49, 2.09]). As was previously the case, the largest effect could be observed on the Supposed Symptoms subscale, followed by Exaggerated Symptoms, Selectivity, and lastly Symptom Combinations (see amended Appendix 3). Additionally, changes in classification accuracy were noted for two DSM scales (see amended Table 6). While previously significant, ROC analysis showed a statistically non-significant result for the DSM Inattention (E) scale. In contrast, the DSM Total (G), yielded a statistically significant result upon correction. These changes did not affect the conclusions drawn from the results.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix 3. Effect Sizes (d) with 95%-Confidence Intervals
Appendix 3. Effect Sizes (d) with 95%-Confidence Intervals
Credible ADHD group (n = 100) vs. simulation group (n = 169) | Credible ADHD group (n = 100) vs. non-credible ADHD group (n = 22) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
d | Lower | Upper | d | Lower | Upper | |
ACI | 1.292 | 0.486 | 2.098 | 0.146 | − 0.958 | 1.249 |
ACI-A | 1.478 | 1.256 | 1.700 | 0.006 | − 0.297 | 0.309 |
ACI-B | 1.203 | 0.970 | 1.436 | 0.306 | − 0.056 | 0.667 |
ACI-C | 0.736 | 0.480 | 0.993 | 0.164 | − 0.207 | 0.535 |
ACI-D | 0.994 | 0.761 | 1.227 | 0.073 | − 0.273 | 0.419 |
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Becke, M., Tucha, L., Weisbrod, M. et al. Correction to: Non-credible symptom report in the clinical evaluation of adult ADHD: development and initial validation of a new validity index embedded in the Conners’ adult ADHD rating scales. J Neural Transm 129, 1315–1319 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00702-022-02533-1
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00702-022-02533-1