
Is ADHD skyrocketing among young people? Experts think not
Health experts and parents have been raising the alarm about a surge in ADHD cases, particularly among young people – but the increase appears to have tapered off in recent years.
Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common mental disorders, affecting an estimated 8 per cent of children and teenagers. Worldwide, around 366 million adults have ADHD, with symptoms including trouble focusing, restlessness, and impulsivity.
But a new analysis, published in the Journal of Affective Disorders, suggests the apparent recent uptick in ADHD cases may be more due to recognition than reality.
It looked at 40 studies on ADHD from 2020 onward. While there were major gaps in data, the highest-quality studies found no significant increase in the overall prevalence of ADHD in that time.
They also found no meaningful increase in new diagnoses from 2020 to 2024, though they have been trending upward in recent decades.
Researchers also noted that a growing number of people are getting tested and seeking support for ADHD.
'Our best evidence suggests the true rate of ADHD isn't increasing that much,' Philip Shaw, director of the King's Maudsley Partnership for Children and Young People, told journalists.
'My hunch is there's such a huge awareness of ADHD that it's often used as… the way young people express they are struggling at school and need help,' added Shaw, who was not involved with the new study.
Researchers said the longer-term increase in ADHD cases is likely due to some combination of 'catch-up' diagnoses among people whose conditions were not detected when they were young, as well as changes to how ADHD is diagnosed, pandemic-era disruptions, social media, and other unknown reasons.
Some have proposed that constant stimulation from social media and mobile phones – which has earned young people the title of the 'distracted generation' – could be driving an increase in ADHD.
A 2023 study, for example, found a link between ADHD symptoms and excessive social media use, smartphone dependence, and internet addiction.
But not all attention problems are ADHD, and 'it's too early to say what's causing what here,' Shaw said. 'We don't know what's the chicken and what's the egg'.
Researchers said more studies are needed to confirm whether more people are actually developing ADHD than in the past, or if they are simply more likely to be diagnosed.
'We should be looking at these questions… and I think that is what's happening,' Shaw said.
A growing number of people are turning to chatbots such as ChatGPT for support with their personal problems.
According to a Harvard report, the demand for AI tools in 2025 suggests a paradigm shift.
Previously, these tools were primarily used for technical purposes; however, as they have become more widely adopted, emotional support and personal development have garnered increased attention.
Rita Marcelino, an IT consultant, and João Aranha, a business development representative, are two young people who turn to ChatGPT for help when they face difficult situations.
Marcelino says she uses it "to combat some nervousness or to help me gain confidence before important moments such as a job interview, a presentation or even to structure thoughts when I feel more indecisive".
Aranha explains that the chatbot's "immediate" availability is an advantage, as using it doesn't require "an appointment".
"Like so many people of my generation, when I have a problem I want to solve it on the spot," he adds.
Asked about the possibility of AI tools replacing psychotherapy, clinical psychologist Ana Rita Oliveira admits that chatbots can, in certain contexts, provide some kind of support in gathering information about managing emotions.
She notes, however, that "therapeutic techniques and strategies are accessible to everyone, they're just a click away, but in psychotherapy, change is based on the relationship between the patient and the psychologist".
Although Marcelino and Aranha use ChatGPT to deal with some challenges, they both also have therapy sessions with a certified psychologist, and describe the two experiences as "completely different".
Aranha believes that the main difference is control, arguing that he is better able to control the "session" held with the chatbots.
"The outcome of the conversation with ChatGPT always depends on our input, i.e. we're talking to someone who says and does what we want. A psychologist, on the other hand, has the ability to turn us round, cut off our train of thought and divert our attention whenever they want," he says.
The increasing use of AI tools has led users, particularly young people, to self-diagnose.
Online self-diagnosis is not new. However, chatbots allow people to ask questions about symptoms, illnesses and treatments, with personalised answers given in seconds.
Oliveira, the psychologist, says some of her patients have arrived at their psychotherapy sessions convinced of their diagnosis, following online research they had done themselves.
"We have to know how to filter what we read. Reaching a diagnosis involves much more than a process of checking symptoms. It involves assessing various dimensions of the individual and this may require human contact," she says.
Oliveira is sceptical of the role that AI can play in therapy, saying that the use of such tools "exclusively harms the therapeutic process for patients" and "can lead to the work of psychologists being discredited".
"I question whether this need for emotional support will ever be met purely through AI. If we have this need, it's because we feel this lack in the relationships we establish in our lives," she says.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Euronews
3 days ago
- Euronews
Is ADHD skyrocketing among young people? Experts think not
Health experts and parents have been raising the alarm about a surge in ADHD cases, particularly among young people – but the increase appears to have tapered off in recent years. Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common mental disorders, affecting an estimated 8 per cent of children and teenagers. Worldwide, around 366 million adults have ADHD, with symptoms including trouble focusing, restlessness, and impulsivity. But a new analysis, published in the Journal of Affective Disorders, suggests the apparent recent uptick in ADHD cases may be more due to recognition than reality. It looked at 40 studies on ADHD from 2020 onward. While there were major gaps in data, the highest-quality studies found no significant increase in the overall prevalence of ADHD in that time. They also found no meaningful increase in new diagnoses from 2020 to 2024, though they have been trending upward in recent decades. Researchers also noted that a growing number of people are getting tested and seeking support for ADHD. 'Our best evidence suggests the true rate of ADHD isn't increasing that much,' Philip Shaw, director of the King's Maudsley Partnership for Children and Young People, told journalists. 'My hunch is there's such a huge awareness of ADHD that it's often used as… the way young people express they are struggling at school and need help,' added Shaw, who was not involved with the new study. Researchers said the longer-term increase in ADHD cases is likely due to some combination of 'catch-up' diagnoses among people whose conditions were not detected when they were young, as well as changes to how ADHD is diagnosed, pandemic-era disruptions, social media, and other unknown reasons. Some have proposed that constant stimulation from social media and mobile phones – which has earned young people the title of the 'distracted generation' – could be driving an increase in ADHD. A 2023 study, for example, found a link between ADHD symptoms and excessive social media use, smartphone dependence, and internet addiction. But not all attention problems are ADHD, and 'it's too early to say what's causing what here,' Shaw said. 'We don't know what's the chicken and what's the egg'. Researchers said more studies are needed to confirm whether more people are actually developing ADHD than in the past, or if they are simply more likely to be diagnosed. 'We should be looking at these questions… and I think that is what's happening,' Shaw said. A growing number of people are turning to chatbots such as ChatGPT for support with their personal problems. According to a Harvard report, the demand for AI tools in 2025 suggests a paradigm shift. Previously, these tools were primarily used for technical purposes; however, as they have become more widely adopted, emotional support and personal development have garnered increased attention. Rita Marcelino, an IT consultant, and João Aranha, a business development representative, are two young people who turn to ChatGPT for help when they face difficult situations. Marcelino says she uses it "to combat some nervousness or to help me gain confidence before important moments such as a job interview, a presentation or even to structure thoughts when I feel more indecisive". Aranha explains that the chatbot's "immediate" availability is an advantage, as using it doesn't require "an appointment". "Like so many people of my generation, when I have a problem I want to solve it on the spot," he adds. Asked about the possibility of AI tools replacing psychotherapy, clinical psychologist Ana Rita Oliveira admits that chatbots can, in certain contexts, provide some kind of support in gathering information about managing emotions. She notes, however, that "therapeutic techniques and strategies are accessible to everyone, they're just a click away, but in psychotherapy, change is based on the relationship between the patient and the psychologist". Although Marcelino and Aranha use ChatGPT to deal with some challenges, they both also have therapy sessions with a certified psychologist, and describe the two experiences as "completely different". Aranha believes that the main difference is control, arguing that he is better able to control the "session" held with the chatbots. "The outcome of the conversation with ChatGPT always depends on our input, i.e. we're talking to someone who says and does what we want. A psychologist, on the other hand, has the ability to turn us round, cut off our train of thought and divert our attention whenever they want," he says. The increasing use of AI tools has led users, particularly young people, to self-diagnose. Online self-diagnosis is not new. However, chatbots allow people to ask questions about symptoms, illnesses and treatments, with personalised answers given in seconds. Oliveira, the psychologist, says some of her patients have arrived at their psychotherapy sessions convinced of their diagnosis, following online research they had done themselves. "We have to know how to filter what we read. Reaching a diagnosis involves much more than a process of checking symptoms. It involves assessing various dimensions of the individual and this may require human contact," she says. Oliveira is sceptical of the role that AI can play in therapy, saying that the use of such tools "exclusively harms the therapeutic process for patients" and "can lead to the work of psychologists being discredited". "I question whether this need for emotional support will ever be met purely through AI. If we have this need, it's because we feel this lack in the relationships we establish in our lives," she says.


Euronews
4 days ago
- Euronews
Can ChatGPT be an alternative to psychotherapy?
A growing number of people are turning to chatbots such as ChatGPT for support with their personal problems. According to a Harvard report, the demand for AI tools in 2025 suggests a paradigm shift. Previously, these tools were primarily used for technical purposes; however, as they have become more widely adopted, emotional support and personal development have garnered increased attention. Rita Marcelino, an IT consultant, and João Aranha, a business development representative, are two young people who turn to ChatGPT for help when they face difficult situations. Marcelino says she uses it "to combat some nervousness or to help me gain confidence before important moments such as a job interview, a presentation or even to structure thoughts when I feel more indecisive". Aranha explains that the chatbot's "immediate" availability is an advantage, as using it doesn't require "an appointment". "Like so many people of my generation, when I have a problem I want to solve it on the spot," he adds. Asked about the possibility of AI tools replacing psychotherapy, clinical psychologist Ana Rita Oliveira admits that chatbots can, in certain contexts, provide some kind of support in gathering information about managing emotions. She notes, however, that "therapeutic techniques and strategies are accessible to everyone, they're just a click away, but in psychotherapy, change is based on the relationship between the patient and the psychologist". Although Marcelino and Aranha use ChatGPT to deal with some challenges, they both also have therapy sessions with a certified psychologist, and describe the two experiences as "completely different". Aranha believes that the main difference is control, arguing that he is better able to control the "session" held with the chatbots. "The outcome of the conversation with ChatGPT always depends on our input, i.e. we're talking to someone who says and does what we want. A psychologist, on the other hand, has the ability to turn us round, cut off our train of thought and divert our attention whenever they want," he says. The increasing use of AI tools has led users, particularly young people, to self-diagnose. Online self-diagnosis is not new. However, chatbots allow people to ask questions about symptoms, illnesses and treatments, with personalised answers given in seconds. Oliveira, the psychologist, says some of her patients have arrived at their psychotherapy sessions convinced of their diagnosis, following online research they had done themselves. "We have to know how to filter what we read. Reaching a diagnosis involves much more than a process of checking symptoms. It involves assessing various dimensions of the individual and this may require human contact," she says. Oliveira is sceptical of the role that AI can play in therapy, saying that the use of such tools "exclusively harms the therapeutic process for patients" and "can lead to the work of psychologists being discredited". "I question whether this need for emotional support will ever be met purely through AI. If we have this need, it's because we feel this lack in the relationships we establish in our lives," she says. In the EU, 4 per cent of people aged 16 and over have reported having an unmet need for a medical examination or treatment. Among individuals who actually have required medical care, the proportion reporting unmet health care is even higher. These unmet medical needs may be due to personal reasons or systemic issues with healthcare provision in individual countries, including long waiting times, costs, and so on. The proportion of people reporting unmet healthcare needs varies significantly across Europe. So, which countries have the highest rates of unmet healthcare needs? What are the main reasons for this? And how do experts and scholars explain the country-level differences? The proportion of people reporting unmet healthcare needs ranged from 0.2 per cent in Cyprus to 15.5 per cent in Estonia, with an EU average of 3.8 per cent. Albania and Greece were among the top three countries, each reporting rates above 13 per cent. Surprisingly, Denmark (12.2 per cent), Finland, and Norway (both over 7.5 per cent) report relatively high levels of unmet healthcare needs, despite being among the wealthy Nordic countries. Sweden also ranked above the EU average. Central and Western European countries like Germany (0.5 per cent), Austria (1.3 per cent), and the Netherlands (1.4 per cent) show very low unmet needs, suggesting highly accessible and efficient healthcare systems. Among the EU's four largest economies, France reported the highest level of unmet healthcare needs at 6.3 per cent, while the others remained below the EU average. Unmet medical needs in the EU consist of two main reasons: reasons related to the healthcare system (2.4 per cent) and reasons that are not related to the health system but are personal factors (1.4 per cent), resulting in a total of 3.8 per cent. These proportions vary widely across EU member states, candidate countries, and EFTA countries included in the survey. Healthcare system issues include three main factors: waiting list (1.2 per cent), treatment being too expensive (1 per cent), and too far to travel for treatment (0.1 per cent), with these figures representing the EU average. Healthcare system-related reasons dominate in five countries, three of which report unmet medical needs exceeding 10 per cent: Estonia (12.9), Greece (11.6), and Albania (10.7). This proportion was also above 7.5 per cent in Finland and Latvia. The sources of systemic problems vary across countries. For example, in Greece and Albania, over 9 per cent of people reported being unable to meet their medical needs due to healthcare being too expensive. In contrast, long waiting lists were the main barrier in Estonia (12 per cent) and Finland (7.5 per cent). Reasons not related to the healthcare system include personal factors, such as: "No time," "Didn't know any good doctor or specialist," "Fear of doctor, hospital, examination or treatment," and "Wanted to wait and see if problem got better on its own". The OECD and European Commission's Health at a Glance: Europe 2024 report notes that focusing only on the subgroup of the population with medical care needs increases the rate of unmet needs in all countries. This excludes those who reported no care needs. In some cases, the increase is quite substantial, Greece being a notable example. Here, over one in five people (21 per cent) who had medical care needs reported that their needs were not met in 2023 due to reasons related to the healthcare system. This was 12 per cent in Finland and 10 per cent in Latvia. In every EU country, people with the lowest incomes face more unmet medical needs than those with the highest incomes, due to reasons related to the healthcare system. In the EU, the overall average was 2.4 per cent. This share rose to 3.8 per cent among low-income groups, while it was just 1.2 per cent among those with higher incomes. This gap is wider in some countries, in particular. For example, in Greece, nearly one in four people (23 per cent) in the lowest income quintile reported unmet medical care, compared to just 3.4 per cent in the highest income group. In Finland, the figures were 10 per cent versus 4.9 per cent, and in France, 5.3 per cent versus 1.9 per cent. "Unmet health needs are an important public health challenge that arises from different reasons," Dr Tit Albreht, President of the European Public Health Association (EUPHA), told Euronews Health. "We can assume that an important part of the causes lies in the governance of health systems, but also in the ways other complementary systems are integrated in a more holistic management of health needs of the population". Tina Taube, Director, Market Access & OMP Policy Lead at European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA), explained that unmet medical needs vary widely across European countries due to differences in disease areas, access to diagnosis and treatment, healthcare system readiness, and national reimbursement policies. She noted that the concept of unmet need is context-specific, depending on the patient, disease type, and available technology. "Needs for cardiovascular patients might differ from the needs of patients with rare diseases… It's not just about product availability but also access to diagnosis and healthcare at national level," she told Euronews Health. Andy Powrie-Smith, Communications Executive Director at EFPIA, emphasised the significant disparities across European countries in terms of access to new treatments. He notes that patients in one country can wait up to seven times longer than those in a neighbouring country due to a variety of barriers. These include regulatory processes, pricing and reimbursement delays, and the readiness of healthcare systems. As treatments become more advanced - for instance, with gene and cell therapies - the need for skilled professionals and robust healthcare infrastructure becomes even more critical. Powrie-Smith stated that differences in healthcare spending, infrastructure, and economic capacity across countries all influence how well a country can deliver new treatments to its population. Albreht of EUPHA pointed out that the level of healthcare financing does not appear to be the decisive factor in the survey results, as some countries with high total health expenditure - such as Denmark, Finland, and Norway - still report high unmet needs, while others with much lower expenditure - like Albania and Greece - show similar patterns. "These results definitely require a closer insight into the figures," he said. Eurostat highlighted that the results are derived from self-reported data, so it is, to a certain extent, affected by respondents' subjective perception as well as by their social and cultural background.


AFP
30-05-2025
- AFP
'Make America Healthy Again' report cites nonexistent studies: authors
The highly anticipated "Make America Healthy Again" (MAHA) report was released on May 22 by the presidential commission tasked with assessing drivers of childhood chronic disease. But it included broken citation links and credits authors with papers they say they did not write. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt downplayed the errors as "formatting issues" during a press briefing on May 29 (archived here). "It does not negate the substance of the report," said Leavitt, who expressed confidence in Kennedy and his team, and insisted their work was "backed on good science." Image White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt takes questions during the daily briefing at the White House in Washington, DC, on May 29, 2025 (AFP / Jim WATSON) The issues were first reported May 29 by NOTUS (archived here), a US digital news website affiliated with the nonprofit Allbritton Journalism Institute. Noah Kreski (archived here), a Columbia University researcher listed as an author of a paper on adolescent anxiety and depression during the Covid-19 pandemic, told AFP the citation is "not one of our studies" and "doesn't appear to be a study that exists at all." The citation included a link (archived here) that purported to send users to an article in the peer-reviewed medical journal JAMA Pediatrics, but it was broken. Jim Michalski, a spokesman for the JAMA Network (archived here), said it "was not published in JAMA Pediatrics or in any JAMA Network journal." Columbia University epidemiologist Katherine Keyes (archived here), who was also listed as an author of the supposed JAMA study, told AFP she does research on the topic but does not know where the statistics credited to her came from, and that she "did not write that paper." She expressed concern about the error saying: "Citation practices are an important part of conducting and reporting rigorous science." She said she would be happy to send her actual research on depressive symptoms in adolescents and young adults "to the MAHA committee to correct the report, although I have not yet received information on where to reach them." Guohua Li, another Columbia University professor named in the citation (archived here), said the reference is "totally fabricated" and that he does not even know Kreski. AFP also spoke with Harold Farber, a pediatrics professor at Baylor College of Medicine (archived here), who said the paper attributed to him "does not exist" nor had he ever collaborated with the co-authors credited in the MAHA report. Similarly, Brian McNeill, spokesperson for Virginia Commonwealth University, confirmed that professor Robert Findling (archived here) did not author a paper the report says he wrote about advertising of psychotropic medications for youth. A fourth paper on ADHD medication was also not published in the journal Pediatrics in 2008 as claimed in the MAHA report, according to the journal's publisher, the American Academy of Pediatrics. A keyword search reveals a blog post with the same title as the purported paper, "Direct-to-consumer advertising and the rise in ADHD medication use among children" but it has a different author and is not a peer-reviewed publication (archived here). The Democratic National Committee blasted the report as "rife with misinformation" in a May 29 press release, saying Kennedy's agency "is justifying its policy priorities with studies and sources that do not exist" (archived here). Citations edited The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) declined to comment, referring AFP's questions to the White House. At her briefing, Leavitt declined to answer how the report was produced and whether artificial intelligence tools may have been used to craft it, directing those questions back to HHS. t reported its analysis of the citations showed "oaicite" was attached to the URLs, the presence of which indicates the use of artificial intelligence products from OpenAI (archived here). Within hours of the briefing, an edited version of the report replaced the original paper on the White House website (archived here). Changes are not flagged or marked as corrections, but the four citations investigated by AFP were replaced with working links. The modifications are as follows: The paper said to come from the team at Columbia University was swapped out for a reference to a briefing on the Teen National Health Interview Survey published by KFF (archived here). The nonexistent paper credited to Farber was replaced with a paper on oral corticosteroid medication prescribed for asthma he published in Pediatrics in 2017 (archived here). An article published in the journal Psychiatric Services in 2006 replaced the paper initially credited to Findling (archived here). The reference to a paper on ADHD medication advertising was supplanted by a 2013 article from The New York Times (archived here) Concerns about Kennedy The revelations about the MAHA study came just a day after Kennedy attacked major medical journals, accusing them of collaborating with the pharmaceutical industry and threatening to bar government scientists from publishing in them. Kennedy was approved as health secretary earlier this year despite widespread alarm from the medical community over his history of promoting vaccine misinformation and denying scientific facts. Since taking office, he has ordered the National Institutes of Health to probe the causes of autism -- a condition he has long falsely tied to the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine. The report's chronic disease references appear to nod to that same disproven theory, discredited by numerous studies since the idea first aired in a late 1990s paper based on falsified data. It also criticizes the "over-medicalization" of children, citing surging prescriptions of psychiatric drugs and antibiotics, and blaming "corporate capture" for skewing scientific research. Image US Senator Roger Marshall (R-KS) (L) look on as Director of the National Institutes of Health Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya holds up a copy of a MAHA health report during a MAHA (Make America Healthy Again) Commission Event in the White House in Washington, DC, on May 22, 2025. A White House report detailing Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s priorities devotes sizable space to stoking fear about vaccines -- even as it tackles more grounded worries over chemicals and diet. (AFP / Jim WATSON) Read more of AFP's reporting on health misinformation here. Gwen Roley and Manon Jacob contributed reporting to this article.