ADHD and Giftedness: A Neurocognitive Consideration of Twice Exceptionality

From gifted to high potential and twice exceptional: A state-of-the-art meta-review

Despite the abundant literature on intelligence and high potential individuals, there is still a lack of international consensus on the terminology and clinical characteristics associated to this population. It has been argued that unstandardized use of diagnosis tools and research methods make comparisons and interpretations of scientific and epidemiological evidence difficult in this field. If multiple cognitive and psychological models have attempted to explain the mechanisms underlying high potentiality, there is a need to confront new scientific evidence with the old, to uproot a global understanding of what constitutes the neurocognitive profile of high-potential in gifted individuals. Another particularly relevant aspect of applied research on high potentiality concerns the challenges faced by individuals referred to as "twice exceptional" in the field of education and in their socio-affective life. Some individuals have demonstrated high forms of intelligence together with learning, affective or neurodevelopmental disorders posing the question as to whether compensating or exacerbating psycho-cognitive mechanisms might underlie their observed behavior. Elucidating same will prove relevant to questions concerning the possible need for differential diagnosis tools, specialized educational and clinical support. A meta-review of the latest findings from neuroscience to developmental psychology, might help in the conception and reviewing of intervention strategies.

Normality in medicine: an empirical elucidation

BACKGROUND

Normality is both a descriptive and a normative concept. Undoubtedly, the normal often operates normatively as an exclusionary tool of cultural authority. While it has prominently found its way into the field of medicine, it remains rather unclear in what sense it is used. Thus, our study sought to elucidate people's understanding of normality in medicine and to identify concepts that are linked to it.

METHODS

Using convenient sampling, we carried out a cross-sectional survey. Since the survey was advertised through social media, we employed an online survey. We performed descriptive and inferential analyses. Predictors were chosen in a theory-driven manner.

RESULTS

In total, 323 persons from 21 countries completed the survey. Analysis revealed that the overall acceptance of normality in medicine was associated with notions of injustice, authority, discrimination, and with having a medical profession. More precisely, for the field of mental health, injustice insensitivity, genderism and transphobia, and authority were positively associated with a person's acceptance of normality; and, for the field of physical health, injustice insensitivity and having a medical profession were positively associated with a person's acceptance of normality. Finally, participants' acceptance of the use of normality in the area of mental health was lower than in the area of physical health.

CONCLUSIONS

What is considered normal has implications for clinical practice, both at an individual and at a policy-level. Acknowledging its normalistic condition, the discipline of medicine has to confront itself with its own contribution to the augmentation of social inequalities through the excessive reliance on the concept of normality. Research that centers the lived experiences of those who are being systematically marginalized because they are deemed abnormal is needed. By empirically elucidating the conceptual relationships between normality in medicine and other variables, we provide points of leverage to deprive normality of its normative power. For medicine, this is needed to first do no harm.

Neurobiological insights into twice-exceptionality: Circuits, cells, and molecules

Twice-exceptional learners face a unique set of challenges arising from the intersection of extraordinary talent and disability. Neurobiology research has the capacity to complement pedagogical research and provide support for twice-exceptional learners. Very few studies have attempted to specifically address the neurobiological underpinnings of twice-exceptionality. However, neurobiologists have built a broad base of knowledge in nervous system function spanning from the level of neural circuits to the molecular basis of behavior. It is known that distinct neural circuits mediate different neural functions, which suggests that 2e learning may result from enhancement in one circuit and disruption in another. Neural circuits are known to adapt and change in response to experience, a cellular process known as neuroplasticity. Plasticity is controlled by a bidirectional connection between the synapse, where neural signals are received, and the nucleus, where regulated gene expression can return to alter synaptic function. Complex molecular mechanisms compose this connection in distinct neural circuits, and genetic alterations in these mechanisms are associated with both memory enhancements and psychiatric disorder. Understanding the consequences of these changes at the molecular, cellular, and circuit levels will provide critical insights into the neurobiological bases of twice-exceptionality.

Gifted Children with ADHD: How Are They Different from Non-gifted Children with ADHD?

The present study focused on inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity differences of gifted children with and without attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Based on clinical assessment utilizing the Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule for Children (ADISC-IV) and the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—Fourth Edition, attendees of a public outpatient child service (boys = 359, girls = 148), with mean age 10.60 years (SD = 3.08 years), were allocated into four groups: ADHD (N = 350), gifted (N = 15), gifted/ADHD (N = 18), and clinical controls (N = 124). The Strengths and Weaknesses of ADHD-Symptoms and Normal Behavior Scale dimensionally assessed inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity variations. Compared to the gifted/ADHD group, the ADHD group had higher scores for inattention and comparable scores for hyperactivity/impulsivity. For most symptoms, the ADHD groups (gifted or not) rated higher than the non-ADHD groups (control and gifted without ADHD). Findings appeared to indicate that (i) ADHD is a valid diagnosis among children who are gifted, (ii) gifted children might tend to be less inattentive than non-gifted ADHD children, and (iii) ADHD-gifted children appear to differ from the non-ADHD-gifted children with regard to specific hyperactive and impulsive behaviors. The practical implication of these findings is that clinicians may wish to focus on these symptoms when diagnosing ADHD among children with high intelligence.

Cognitive correlates of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents with high intellectual ability

BACKGROUND

There is an ongoing debate as to whether attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in highly intelligent individuals has a similar presentation as in average intelligent individuals. The aim of this study was to examine the cognitive correlates of ADHD in highly intelligent children and adolescents with ADHD.

METHOD

Two independent samples (N = 204 and N = 84) of (1) high intelligence quotient (IQ) (IQ ≥ 120) children and adolescents with ADHD were used, carefully matched on age, gender, ADHD severity, and IQ with (2) control participants with high intelligence, (3) participants with ADHD with an average intelligence (IQ 90-110), and (4) control participants with an average intelligence. These samples were selected from the Dutch node of the International Multicenter ADHD Genetics (NeuroIMAGE) and Tracking Adolescents' Individual Lives Survey (TRAILS) cohorts, respectively, in which a large battery of cognitive tasks was administered. Linear mixed models were used to examine the main effects of ADHD and IQ and their interaction on cognitive performance.

RESULTS

ADHD-control group differences were not moderated by IQ; mostly equally large ADHD-control differences in cognitive performance were found for high versus average intelligent groups. The small moderating effects found mostly indicated somewhat milder cognitive problems in highly intelligent individuals with ADHD. Overall, highly intelligent children and adolescents with ADHD performed at the level of the average intelligent control children.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate the cognitive profile of ADHD is similar in highly versus average intelligent individuals with ADHD, although ADHD-related cognitive deficits may be easily overlooked in the high intelligence population when compared to the typical (i.e., average intelligent) control group.

[Children with high potential and difficulties: Contributions of clinical research]

We have been sensitized to children with high intellectual potential (HIP) having difficulties given the number of children consulting in our outpatient medico-psychological centres for scholastic problems (possibly leading to school failure), anxiety disorders or behavioral disorders such as attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and in which a high intellectual potential was discovered during psychological assessments. It is the contrast, and more precisely the paradox, between the high intellectual potential of these children and their scholastic difficulties (including school failure), and the psychic suffering expressed by some of them, which led us to question, challenge and propose therapeutic and educational care adapted to these children. It is in this context that we created in December 2005 the CNAHP (National Center for Assistance to High Potential children and adolescents) which is a public centre integrated into the hospital-university department of child and adolescent psychiatry at Rennes. It is noteworthy that not all children with HIP have difficulties, and children with school failure or behavioral problems are not always children with HIP. However, it is necessary not to minimize the problem raised by children with HIP with difficulties by ignoring its frequency or by considering that these children are "intelligent" enough to manage by themselves and do not need to be helped, whereas some of them can show school failure and even be de-scholarized. Indeed, based on the definition of the World Health Organization (WHO) of an intellectual Quotient (IQ) above 130 (level corresponding to a statistical threshold), the frequency of children with HIP represents 2.3% of the population of schoolchildren aged 6 to 16. The frequency is therefore not so rare. However, it remains to be determined by French epidemiological studies what is the actual frequency of children with difficulties within a population of children with HIP. The analysis of the CNAHP research data from a clinical population (children with HIP consulting for difficulties) highlights that children with HIP can show major school problems (including school failure, defined here as having or foreseeing repetition of a grade), which corresponds to 7.5% of 611 children with HIP consulting at the CNAHP) and socioemotional problems (emotional regulation disorders) in relation to their high intellectual potential. In particular, anxiety disorders were the most frequent psychiatric disorders observed in this population (40.5%) and were significantly associated with high verbal potential. This significant association requires further studies to avoid establishing a simplistic unidirectional and reductive linear cause-effect relationships. Indeed, a high verbal potential can elicit and/or reinforce anxiety-producing representations, but anxiety disorders may also lead to a defensive over investment of verbal language. The results are discussed in this article and suggest that scholastic and/or psychological difficulties encountered by some children with HIP can be related to their high intellectual potential. It is necessary to develop therapeutic and educational care adapted to these children from a better understanding, based on research results, of their possible difficulties but also cognitive abilities. Even when children with HIP have scholastic and/or psychological difficulties, some of their cognitive skills can be preserved contrary to appearances, with for example, as seen in the CNAHP results, excellent attentional capacities shown by cognitive tests contrasting with behavioral attention deficit reported by parents. These skills are important to identify as they are resources which support the therapeutic and educational project. It is probably through an articulation among professionals from national education, health and research, in alliance with the family (parents, child, and siblings), that advances will be made. In the same way that professionals have been interested in children with intellectual disabilities, it is important to be concerned by children with HIP and difficulties located at the other end of the continuum. It is a question of ethics which concerns both caregivers and teachers. It is also a societal issue that concerns all of us given that the expression of high intellectual and creative potential in children may be essential to the societal development of innovative strategies and each nation's future. Finally, the discussion can be extended to all children, independent of their potential. What we learn from children with HIP and difficulties can be applied to each child: it is important at family, school and societal levels to facilitate the expression of the potential of children, to value their skills, and to help them to remove possible inhibitions of their potential based on individualized projects. The acceptance of singularity and differences in children can contribute to tolerance and the development of creativity, in the interest of the subject and of society.

High intelligence and the risk of ADHD and other psychopathology

BackgroundHigh intelligence may be associated with positive (adaptive, desired) outcomes, but may also come with disadvantages.AimsTo contribute empirically to the debate concerning whether a trade-off in IQ scores exists in relation to attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and related problems, suggesting that high intelligence - like low intelligence - increases the risk of ADHD.MethodCurves of the relation between IQ score and ADHD problems were fitted to questionnaire data (parent, teacher, self-report} in a population-based study of 2221 children and adolescents aged 10-12 years. Externalising and internalising problems were included for comparison purposes.ResultsHigher IQ score was most strongly related to fewer attention problems, with more rater discrepancy in the high v. average IQ range. Attention problems - but only minimally hyperactivity/impulsivity problems - predicted functional impairment at school, also in the higher IQ range.ConclusionsAttention problems in highly intelligent children are exceptional and affect school performance; they are therefore a reason for clinical concern.

Impact of the DSM-V Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Criteria for Diagnosing Children With High IQ

This study compared the number of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) cases defined by Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM)-IV versus DSM-V criterion in children who have learning or behavioral problems with high IQ. The medical records of children ≤15 years of age who presented with learning or behavioral problems and underwent a Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC)-III IQ test at the Pediatric Outpatient Clinic unit between 2010 and 2015 were reviewed. Information on DSM-IV and DSM-V criteria for ADHD were derived from computer-based medical records. Twenty-eight children who had learning or behavioral problems were identified to have a full-scale IQ ≥120. Sixteen of these high-IQ children met the DSM-IV criteria diagnosis for ADHD. Applying the extension of the age-of-onset criterion from 7 to 12 years in DSM-V led to an increase of three cases, all of which were the inattentive type ADHD. Including the pervasive developmental disorder criterion led to an increase of one case. The total number of ADHD cases also increased from 16 to 20 in this group. The data supported the hypothesis that applying the extension of the age-of-onset ADHD criterion and enabling the diagnosis of children with pervasive developmental disorders will increase the number of ADHD diagnoses among children with high IQ.

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and intellectual giftedness: a study of symptom frequency and minor physical anomalies

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the presence of symptoms of attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in intellectually gifted adults and children.

METHODS

Two cross-sectional studies were performed in children and adults whose intelligence quotient (IQ) had been previously evaluated using Raven's Progressive Matrices (RPM) test. Seventy-seven adults displaying IQ scores above the 98th percentile were assessed using the Adult Self-Report Scale (ASRS-18) for signs of ADHD and a modified Waldrop scale for minor physical anomalies (MPAs). Thirty-nine children (grades 1-5) exhibiting IQ scores above the 99th percentile, as well as an equally matched control group, were assessed for ADHD by teachers using the Swanson, Nolan and Pelham IV Rating Scale (SNAP-IV) as used in the NIMH Collaborative Multisite Multimodal Treatment Study of Children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (MTA-SNAP-IV).

RESULTS

In gifted adults, the frequency of ADHD-positive cases was 37.8%, and the total MPA score was significantly associated with ADHD (p < 0.001). In children, the ADHD-positive case frequency was 15.38% in the gifted group and 7.69% in the control group (odds ratio [OR] = 2.18, p = 0.288).

CONCLUSIONS

The high frequency of ADHD symptoms observed, both in gifted adults and in gifted (and non-gifted) children, further supports the validity of this diagnosis in this population. Furthermore, the significant association between MPAs and ADHD suggests that a neurodevelopmental condition underlies these symptoms.