Response inhibition, defined as the ability to withhold a response, is considered to be a core deficit in various mental illnesses. Measures of response inhibition have been used to define functional deficits, as markers of genetic risk, in neuroimaging studies, and for diagnostic purposes in these disorders. However, the magnitude of the deficit across psychopathologies has not been systematically assessed. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of performance on commonly used measures of the ability to withhold a response: go/no-go task, Conners' continuous performance task (CCPT), and sustained attention to response task (SART). The primary variable of interest in each of these tasks was commission errors (CE), which provides an index of one's ability to correctly withhold a response. In addition, we examined omission errors (OE) which are an index of sustained attention; and mean reaction time (RT; MRT). Three-hundred and 18 studies in 11 different psychiatric disorders met inclusion criteria. Weighted mean effect sizes (ESs) were calculated to measure the magnitude of the deficit. In general, we found low-to-medium ESs for commission errors ranging from g = -0.10 for anxiety disorder to medium ESs of g = 0.52 for bipolar disorder. Small-to-medium deficits in withholding were found in various disorders. Results indicate that deficits in withholding are insufficiently sensitive or specific to be used individually as a diagnostic measure or biomarker in most disorders.

Background Population‐based samples with valid, quantitative and genetically informative trait measures of psychopathology could be a powerful complement to case/control genetic designs. We report the convergent and predictive validity of the parent‐ and self‐report versions of the Strengths and Weaknesses of ADHD Symptoms and Normal Behavior Rating Scale (SWAN). We tested if SWAN scores were associated with ADHD diagnosis, ADHD polygenic risk, as well as traits and polygenic risk for disorders that co‐occur with ADHD: anxiety and obsessive‐compulsive disorder (OCD). Methods We collected parent‐ and self‐report SWAN scores in a sample of 15,560 children and adolescents (6–17 years) recruited at a science museum (Spit for Science sample). We established age and sex norms for the SWAN. Sensitivity‐specificity analyses determined SWAN cut‐points that discriminated those with and without a reported ADHD diagnosis. These cut‐points were validated in a clinic sample (266 ADHD cases; 36 controls). Convergent validity was established using the Conners’ parent‐ and self‐report scales. Using Spit for Science participants with genome‐wide data (n = 5,154), we tested if low, medium and high SWAN scores were associated with polygenic risk for ADHD, OCD and anxiety disorders. Results Parent‐ and self‐report SWAN scores showed high convergent validity with Conners’ scales and distinguished ADHD participants with high sensitivity and specificity in the Spit for Science sample. In a clinic sample, the Spit for Science cut‐points discriminated ADHD cases from controls with a sensitivity of 84% and specificity of 92%. High SWAN scores and scores above the Spit for Science cut‐points were significantly associated with polygenic risk for ADHD. SWAN scores were not associated with polygenic risk for OCD or anxiety disorders. Conclusions Our study supports the validity of the parent‐ and self‐report SWAN scales and their potential in ADHD population‐based genetic research.

Although peer relations are recognized as a fundamental developmental context, they have been rarely studied as a means of understanding the effects of socioeconomic status and inequality. In this paper, we show how and why peer relations provide a unique and powerful opportunity to assess the differential risks and resources available in the peer system to children and adolescents from different SES spectra. We argue that research on the intersection between SES and peer relations will enrich both these domains of study.

BackgroundValid and genetically-informative trait measures of psychopathology collected in the general population would provide a powerful complement to case/control genetic designs. We report the convergent, predictive and discriminant validity of the parent- and the self-report versions of the Strengths and Weaknesses of ADHD Symptoms and Normal Behavior Rating Scale (SWAN) for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) traits. We tested if SWAN ADHD scores were associated with ADHD diagnosis, ADHD polygenic risk, as well as with traits and polygenic risk for co-occurring disorders such as anxiety and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD).MethodsWe collected parent- and self-report SWAN scores in a community sample (n=15,560; 6-18 years of age) and created norms. Sensitivity-specificity analyses determined SWAN cut-points that discriminated those with a community ADHD diagnosis (n=972) from those without a community diagnosis. We validated cut-points from the community sample in a clinical sample (266 ADHD cases; 36 controls). We tested if SWAN scores were associated with anxiety and obsessive-compulsive (OC) traits and polygenic risk for ADHD, OCD and anxiety disorders.ResultsBoth the parent- and the self-report SWAN measures showed high convergent validity with established ADHD measures and distinguished ADHD participants with high sensitivity and specificity in the community sample. Cut-points established in the community sample discriminated ADHD clinic cases from controls with a sensitivity of 86% and specificity of 94%. High parent- and self-report SWAN scores and scores above the community-based cut-points were associated with polygenic risk for ADHD. High ADHD traits were associated with high anxiety traits, but not OC traits. SWAN scores were not associated with OCD or anxiety disorder polygenic risk.ConclusionThe parent- and self-report SWAN are potentially useful in genetic research because they predict ADHD diagnoses and are associated with ADHD polygenic risk.