February 26, 2021

Evaluating Financial Decision-Making in Adults With ADHD

A Dutch and German team compared the performance of 45 adults with ADHD and 51 normally developing controls on a battery of standardized tests and questionnaires designed to assess competence in financial decision-making (FDM). These were supplemented with neuropsychological tests, as well as evaluations of each participant’s personal financial situation.

The two groups had roughly comparable demographic characteristics. There were no significant differences in age, gender balance, years of education, or work status. Students were excluded from both groups because they tend to be financially dependent and to have little or no income.

The ADHD group scored more than three times higher on self-report questionnaires for both the retrospective assessment of childhood symptoms ( Wender Utah Rating Scale—Childhood) and for evaluating current symptoms of ADHD (ADHD self-report scale). Researchers did not perform clinical evaluations of ADHD.

To determine their personal financial situation, participants were asked about their income range as well as, “Do you have debts other than mortgage or study loans?”;“Do you receive social security?”; “Do you have a savings account?”;“Do you save actively, that is, do you put money in your savings account on a regular basis?”; “Do you save for retirement?”; and “Do you own a house?” They were also asked how much they set aside in monthly savings, and, where applicable, how much they receive in social security.

On five out of nine criteria, significant differences emerged between the two groups. Whereas healthy controls had median incomes in the range of €35,000 to €45,000, for those with ADHD it was dramatically lower, between €15,000 and €25,000. Healthy controls also had twice as much disposable income. Whereas almost half of adults with ADHD reported debts other than mortgage or educational loans, only a third as many healthy adults had such debt. And whereas only slightly over half of those with ADHD reported having savings accounts, among healthy adults it was more than six out of seven. Finally, healthy controls were four times as likely to own a home.

Participants were then given standardized tests to evaluate financial competence, financial decision-making capacity, financial decision styles, the ability to make financial decisions using decision rules, the capacity to make decisions with implications for the future, impulsive buying tendencies, and a gambling task as a measure of emotional decision-making.

Adults with ADHD scored significantly lower than healthy adults on the financial competence test, and in particular, on financial abilities, financial judgment, financial management, and financial support resources. Similar outcomes emerged from the financial decision-making capacity test, especially when it came to identifying and understanding relevant information. Adults with ADHD were also significantly more likely to use avoidant and spontaneous decision styles. They also showed significantly more temporal discounting, meaning they tended to prefer immediate gratification over long-term financial security. That translated into significantly higher propensities to buy on impulse. In all cases these differences had large effect sizes.

Finally, participants were tested on nine cognitive functions: information processing speed, vigilance and selective attention, inhibition, interference, figural fluency, cognitive flexibility, task switching, verbal working memory, and numeracy.

Those with ADHD performed significantly worse, with medium effect sizes, on three cognitive measures: vigilance, interference, and numeracy. There were no significant differences on the other six measures.

The authors concluded, “The results show that the personal financial situation of adults with ADHD was less optimal than the financial situation of healthy controls. Furthermore, adults with ADHD showed significantly decreased performances compared with healthy controls in five out of seven tasks measuring FDM and on measures of vigilance, interference, and numeracy. However, mediation analyses indicated that differences in cognitive functioning cannot fully explain the differences with regard to FDM between adults with ADHD and healthy controls.”

They also pointed to limitations of the study. One is that 19 of the 45 adults with ADHD had comorbid disorders, of which three were substance dependencies. However, removing them had little effect on the outcome. Another limitation was that adults with ADHD were off medication during the testing, so it is unclear how stimulants would affect the test outcomes. The authors state, “The influence of treatment use should, therefore, be explored in future research on FDM and adults with ADHD.”

Dorien F. Bangma, et al., “Financial Decision-Making in Adults With ADHD,” Neuropsychology (2019), http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/neu0000571.

Related posts

No items found.

Updates on ADHD and Vitamin D

The Background on ADHD and Vitamin D

In a blog published in the early days of The ADHD Evidence Project, we discussed an Iranian study examining the association between Vitamin D levels and ADHD in children. The meta-analysis combined 13 studies for a total of 10,344 participants. The researchers found that youth with ADHD had "modest but significant" lower serum concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D compared to those without ADHD.

They also identified four prospective studies that compared maternal vitamin D levels with the subsequent development of ADHD symptoms in their children. Two of these used maternal serum levels, and two used umbilical cord serum levels. Together, these studies found that low maternal vitamin D levels were associated with a 40% higher risk of ADHD in their children. 

Ultimately, the researchers noted that this result "should be considered with caution" because it was heavily dependent on one of the prospective studies included in the analysis. We concluded our blog by pointing out that further research, including more longitudinal studies, is needed before clinicians should start recommending vitamin D supplementation to ADHD patients. 

Further Research: 

Since publishing that initial blog, several more studies have been published about this association. 

The World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) and the Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Disorders (CANMAT) convened an international task force involving 31 leading academics and clinicians from 15 countries between 2019 and 2021. Their goal was to provide a definitive, evidence-based report to assist clinicians in making decisions around the recommendation of nutraceuticals and phytoceuticals for major psychiatric disorders.

For ADHD, the guidelines found only weak support for micronutrients and vitamin D in treatment. Overall, the task force concluded that nutraceuticals and phytoceuticals currently offer very limited evidence‑based benefit for ADHD management.

Another study published in 2023 systematically assessed the results of previously published studies to examine the associations between maternal vitamin D levels, measured as circulating 25(OH)D levels in pregnancy or at birth, and later offspring psychiatric outcomes. This study found a clear association between maternal vitamin D deficiency and subsequent offspring ADHD. They concluded, “Future studies with larger sample sizes, longer follow-up periods, and prenatal vitamin D assessed at multiple time points are needed.”  To that, I will add that studies of this issue should use genetically informed designs to avoid confounding.

Conclusion:

Taking into account the updated research on the topic, there does seem to be an association between low prenatal vitamin D levels and the risk of subsequent offspring ADHD, but it is too soon to say it is a causal relationship due to the possibility of confounding. There is no high-quality evidence, however, that supplementing with vitamin D will significantly reduce symptoms in current ADHD patients. 

July 28, 2025

What Metabolites Tell Us About ADHD — And What This Means for Diet and Treatment

New research has uncovered important links between certain blood metabolites and ADHD by using a genetic method called Mendelian randomization. This approach leverages natural genetic differences to help identify which metabolites might actually cause changes in ADHD risk, offering stronger clues than traditional observational studies.

Key Metabolic Pathways Involved:

The study found 42 plasma metabolites with a causal relationship to ADHD. Most fall into two major groups:

  • Amino acid metabolites from protein metabolism, including those related to tyrosine, methionine, cysteine, and taurine.

  • Fatty acids, especially long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) like DHA and EPA, important for brain function.

What Does This Mean for Diet and ADHD?

Since many metabolites come from dietary sources like proteins and fats this supports the idea that diet could influence metabolic pathways involved in ADHD. However, because the study focused on genetic influences on metabolite levels, it doesn’t directly prove that dietary changes will have the same effects.

Notable Metabolites:

  • 3-Methoxytyramine sulfate (MTS): linked to dopamine metabolism, higher genetic levels of MTS were associated with a lower risk of ADHD. Dopamine plays a crucial role in attention and behavior.

  • DHA and EPA: Omega-3 fatty acids abundant in the brain; higher levels were linked to reduced ADHD risk, supporting existing research on omega-3 supplements.

  • N-acetylneuraminate: Involved in brain development and immune function, with higher levels linked to increased ADHD risk, though more research is needed to understand this.

Five metabolites showed bidirectional links with ADHD, meaning genetic risk for ADHD also affects their levels which suggests a complex interaction between brain function and metabolism.

Twelve ADHD-related metabolites are targets of existing drugs or supplements, including:

  • Acetylcysteine: an antioxidant used in various treatments.

  • DHA supplements: widely used to support brain and heart health.

What This Study Doesn’t Show

While these findings highlight biological pathways, they don’t prove that changing diet will directly alter ADHD symptoms. Metabolite levels are shaped by genetics plus environment, lifestyle, and health factors, which require further study.

Conclusion: 

This research provides stronger evidence of metabolic pathways involved in ADHD and points to new possibilities for diagnosis and treatment. Future work could explore how diet or drugs might safely adjust these metabolites to help manage ADHD.

While this study strengthens the link between amino acid and fatty acid metabolism and ADHD risk, suggesting that diet could play a role, ultimately more research is still needed before experts could use this research to give specific nutritional advice.

July 21, 2025

Network Meta-analysis Explores Long-term Efficacy of Nonpharmacological Treatments for Improving Inhibitory Control in Children and Adolescents with ADHD

Background Info:

Executive functions include inhibitory control, working memory, and cognitive flexibility. Inhibitory control is the ability to suppress distractions and focus on goals, which is the main deficit in ADHD. 

Children and adolescents with ADHD often have off-task, unrelated thoughts and are easily distracted, limiting their sustained attention. This makes it difficult for them to focus on tasks and leads to impulsive behaviors that affect their daily life, academics, and social interactions. Improving inhibitory control in ADHD children and adolescents is essential. 

Stimulant medications are commonly used to treat ADHD. However, side effects like insomnia, loss of appetite, and headaches may make parents hesitant to use these medications for their children. 

Non-pharmacological treatments like cognitive training, behavior therapy, and physical exercise have gained attention for their lack of side effects. Research shows that some non-pharmacological methods can improve cognitive outcomes significantly, underscoring their potential in treating ADHD. 

Study:

A Chinese research team identified four key gaps in current research on non-pharmacological treatments for inhibitory control in children with ADHD: 

  • Existing meta-analyses seldom differentiate between short-term and long-term interventions.  
  • Most studies focus primarily on short-term effects and neglect evaluation of maintenance effects through follow-up assessments.  
  • New treatment methods, such as meditation and board games, have not been systematically assessed in meta-analyses for their impact on inhibitory control in children and adolescents with ADHD, leaving their effectiveness uncertain.  
  • Traditional meta-analysis does not tell us which intervention is most effective. Without this comparative analysis, it is difficult to rank efficacy. 

The team therefore performed a network meta-analysis of long-term randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess and rank the effectiveness of various non-pharmacological treatments on inhibitory control in children and adolescents with ADHD. 

The team included only RCTs relying on professional diagnoses of ADHD, excluding those based only on parent and teacher rating scales.  

The included studies measured inhibitory control using objective neurocognitive tasks, such as the Stroop test and the Go/No-Go test, to reduce potential subjective bias. Studies relying on parent- or teacher-reported questionnaires were excluded. 

Controls either received no intervention or placebo, such as watching running videos and attending history classes. 

Meta-analysis of 16 studies combining 546 participants found large short-term effect size improvements in inhibitory control from physical exercise. But the two studies with a total of 110 participants that performed a follow-up test reported only a small-to-medium effect size improvement. 

For cognitive training, a meta-analysis of fifteen studies totaling 674 participants reported a medium effect size of short-term improvement in inhibitory control. The ten studies with 563 participants that performed a follow-up test found only a small effect size improvement since treatment initiation. 

For behavioral therapy, meta-analysis of six studies encompassing 244 individuals likewise found a medium effect size short-term improvement in inhibitory control. In this case, however two studies combining 91 participants that performed a follow-up test reported that the medium effect size improvement was maintained. 

For neurofeedback, meta-analysis of seven studies encompassing 186 individuals found a small-to-medium effect size short-term improvement in inhibitory control. The only study that performed a follow-up test reported a small effect size improvement since treatment initiation. 

The two studies with a combined 44 individuals exploring board games found no significant improvement in inhibitory control. Likewise, the two studies combining 32 participants that explored meditation found no significant improvement in inhibitory control. 

There was no indication of publication bias. 

Conclusion:

The team concluded, “Existing evidence shows that physical exercise, behavior therapy, cognitive training, and neurofeedback can effectively improve the inhibitory control of children and adolescents with ADHD. However, meditation, EMG feedback, and board games did not significantly affect inhibitory control. Physical exercise has the best effect among all non-pharmacological treatments, but its impact will be weakened after intervention. Behavior therapy and cognitive training had a slightly lower effect, but they have a better maintenance effect.” 

Ultimately, the study results suggest that non-drug treatments can help children and teens with ADHD improve their ability to control their actions and stay focused. Some methods, like physical exercise, work well at first but may fade once the activity stops. Other methods, like behavioral therapy and cognitive training, may take a little longer to show results but can last longer and make a bigger difference over time. Ultimately, and most importantly, because this work did not study the symptoms of ADHD or its real-world impairments, it provides no reason to change current treatment practices for ADHD.

July 16, 2025