# data[].attributes.body
Great for parents or educators Features an A-Z guide on a wide variety of subjects

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Child Mind Institute | Transforming Children’s Lives.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Child Mind Institute is an independent nonprofit dedicated to transforming the lives of children struggling with mental health and learning disorders.

# data[].attributes.body
Partial Chapter on Psychotic Disorders

# data[].attributes.body
Addresses possible ways to intervene

# data[].attributes.body
Extensive information on Referrals

# data[].attributes.body
Resources and PD for working with students with Disabilities

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"We initially chose IRIS because of the past experiences and their credible research-based, high-quality modules that align with specific areas of growth and need to support a state-directed corrective action plan in our region."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"We initially chose IRIS because of the past experiences and their credible research-based, high-quality modules that align with specific areas of growth and need to support a state-directed corrective action plan in our region."

# data[].attributes.body
Created by the Child Mind Institute

# data[].attributes.body
Explores symptoms and interventions

# data[].attributes.body
Created by NAMI

# data[].attributes.body
Shows symptoms and possible interventions

# data[].attributes.headline
Disruptive and Conduct Disorders Fact Sheet

# data[].attributes.subject
Disruptive and Conduct Disorders Fact Sheet

# data[].attributes.body
Gives symptoms as well as interventions

# data[].attributes.body
Has a very useful table

# data[].attributes.body
Gives great information about ADD and ADHD

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Home - ADDA - Attention Deficit Disorder Association

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Empowering adults with adhd to live their best lives A Different Brain Requires a Different Approach Whether you're newly diagnosed, wondering if you have ADHD, or simply ready to take charge of your life - we're here to help. Have ...

# data[].attributes.body
Signposts give specific information about a variety of disorders

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
News Update

14/11/2023

FEAPDA
REGISTRATION & CALL FOR CONTRIBUTIONS - 27th FEAPDA Conference

Diversity in deaf education: Exploring the diversity of deaf learners in their many lives: implications for our knowledge and practice.

26-27 April 2024 in The Grand Hotel, Malahide, Co. Dublin, Ireland.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
National Council for Special Education - Working to deliver a better special education service - Working to deliver a better special education service

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
14/11/2023 FEAPDA REGISTRATION & CALL FOR CONTRIBUTIONS - 27th FEAPDA Conference Diversity in deaf education: Exploring the diversity of deaf learners in their many lives: implications for our knowledge and practice. 26-27 April 2024 in The Grand Hotel, Malahide, Co. Dublin, Ireland.

# data[].attributes.body
Uses ASCA model

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Addressing Conduct Disorder in Elementary School Children An Application of the ASCA Model

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Is it a modification or is it an accommodation

# data[].attributes.body
Quick breakdown on key aspects of each

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Both Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) and 504 plans can offer formal help for K-12 students who are struggling in school. They're similar in some ways but very different in others. This chart compares them side by side to help you understand the differences.

A blueprint or plan for a child's special education experience at school.

A blueprint or plan for how the school will provide support and remove barriers for a student with a disability.

To get an IEP, there are two requirements: A child has one or more of the 13 disabilities listed in IDEA. The law lists specific challenges, like learning disabilities, ADHD, autism, and others. And the disability must affect the child's educational performance and/or ability to learn and benefit from the general education curriculum. The child must need specialized instruction to make progress in school.

To get a 504 plan, there are two requirements: A child has any disability. Section 504 covers a wide range of different struggles in school. And the disability must interfere with the child's ability to learn in a general education classroom. Section 504 has a broader definition of a disability than IDEA. (It says a disability must substantially limit one or more basic life activities. This can include learning, reading, communicating, and thinking.) That's why a child who doesn't qualify for an IEP might still be able to get a 504 plan.

There are strict legal requirements about who participates. With a few exceptions, the entire IEP team must be present for IEP meetings. The team must include:

The rules about who's on the 504 team are less specific than they are for an IEP. A 504 plan is created by a team of people who are familiar with the child and who understand the evaluation data and special services options. This might include:

* The child's parent or caregiver

* General and special education teachers

* The school principal

* The child's parent or caregiver

* At least one of the child's general education teachers

* At least one special education teacher

* A school psychologist or other specialist who can interpret evaluation results

* A district representative with authority over special education services

The IEP sets learning goals and describes the services the school will provide. It's a written document. Here are some of the most important things the IEP must include:

There is no standard 504 plan. Unlike an IEP, a 504 plan doesn't have to be a written document. A 504 plan generally includes the following:

* Specific accommodations, supports, or services for the child

* Names of who will provide each service

* Name of the person responsible for ensuring the plan is implemented

* The child's present levels of academic and functional performance - how the child is currently doing in school

* Annual education goals for the child and how the school will track progress

* The services the child will get - this may include special education, related, supplementary, and extended school year services

* The timing of services - when they start, how often they occur, and how long they last

* Any accommodations - changes to the child's learning environment

* Any modifications - changes to what the child is expected to learn or know

* How the child will participate in standardized tests

* How the child will be included in general education classes and school activities

When the school wants to change a child's services or placement, it has to tell families in writing before the change. This is called prior written notice. Notice is also required for any IEP meetings and evaluations. Families also have "stay put" rights to keep services in place while there's a disagreement about the IEP.

The school must notify families about an evaluation or a "significant change" in placement. Notice doesn't have to be in writing, but most schools do so anyway.

How to resolve disputes

IDEA gives families several ways to resolve disputes (usually in this order):

Section 504 gives families several options for resolving disagreements with the school:

* Mediation

* Alternative dispute resolution

* Impartial hearing

* Complaint to the Office for Civil Rights (OCR)

* Lawsuit

* Mediation

* Due process complaint

* Resolution session

* Civil lawsuit

* State complaint

* Lawsuit

And if you need help navigating special education law in your state, consider reaching out to your local Parent Training and Information Center. The people there can answer questions and give practical advice on issues specific to your area.

Do you want to learn more about how IEPs and 504 plans compare? Watch as an expert explains the differences between them.

About the author

About the author

The Understood Team is made up of passionate writers and editors. Many of them have kids who learn and think differently.

Reviewed by

Reviewed by

Andrew M.I. Lee, JD is an editor and attorney who strives to help people understand complex legal, education, and parenting issues.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
IEP vs. 504 Plan: What's the Difference?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) and 504 plans are similar but different. See how they compare in what they provide and the processes and laws involved.

# data[].attributes.body
Quick Guide

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
At a glance

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires public schools to provide special education services to eligible students.

IDEA covers 13 disability categories.

Not every student who struggles in school qualifies.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires public schools to provide special education and related services to eligible students. But not every child who struggles in school qualifies. To be covered, a child's school performance must be "adversely affected" by a disability in one of the 13 categories below.

1. Specific learning disability (SLD)

The "specific learning disability" (SLD) category covers a specific group of learning challenges. These conditions affect a child's ability to read, write, listen, speak, reason, or do math. Here are some examples of what could fall into this category:

SLD is the most common category under IDEA. In the 2018-19 school year, around 33 percent of students who qualified did so under this category.

2. Other health impairment

The "other health impairment" category covers conditions that limit a child's strength, energy, or alertness. One example is ADHD, which impacts attention and executive function.

3. Autism spectrum disorder (ASD)

ASD is a developmental disability. It involves a wide range of symptoms, but it mainly affects a child's social and communication skills. It can also impact behavior.

Various mental health issues can fall under the "emotional disturbance" category. They may include anxiety disorder, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and depression. (Some of these may also be covered under "other health impairment.")

5. Speech or language impairment

This category covers difficulties with speech or language. A common example is stuttering. Other examples are trouble pronouncing words or making sounds with the voice. It also covers language problems that make it hard for kids to understand words or express themselves.

6. Visual impairment, including blindness

A child who has eyesight problems is considered to have a visual impairment. This category includes both partial sight and blindness. If eyewear can correct a vision problem, then it doesn't qualify.

Kids with a diagnosis of deafness fall under this category. These are kids who can't hear most or all sounds, even with a hearing aid.

The term "hearing impairment" refers to a hearing loss not covered by the definition of deafness. This type of loss can change over time. Being hard of hearing is not the same thing as having trouble with auditory or language processing.

Kids with a diagnosis of deaf-blindness have both severe hearing and vision loss. Their communication and other needs are so unique that programs for just the deaf or blind can't meet them.

10. Orthopedic impairment

An orthopedic impairment is when kids lack function or ability in their bodies. An example is cerebral palsy.

11. Intellectual disability

Kids with this type of disability have below-average intellectual ability. They may also have poor communication, self-care, and social skills. Down syndrome is one example of a condition that involves an intellectual disability.

12. Traumatic brain injury

This is a brain injury caused by an accident or some kind of physical force.

13. Multiple disabilities

A child with multiple disabilities has more than one condition covered by IDEA. Having multiple issues creates educational needs that can't be met in a program designed for any one disability.

Having a disability is not enough to qualify for special education. The disability has to have an "adverse effect" on a child's education.

Key takeaways

Each of the 13 disability categories in IDEA can cover a range of difficulties.

Dyslexia, dyscalculia, and written expression disorder fall under the "specific learning disability" category.

"Other health impairment" can cover ADHD.

About the author

About the author

Andrew M.I. Lee, JD is an editor and attorney who strives to help people understand complex legal, education, and parenting issues.

Reviewed by

Reviewed by

Rayma Griffin, MA, MEd has spent 40 years working with children with learning and thinking differences in the classroom and as an administrator.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
See a list of the 13 IDEA disability categories. Find out which disabilities can qualify kids for special education.

# data[].attributes.body
Information on Counseling Youth with Bipolar Disorder

# data[].attributes.headline
Center for Parent Information and Resources

# data[].attributes.subject
Center for Parent Information and Resources

# data[].attributes.body
Great resources for parents to find local or online support for children with disabilities

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Finding the motivation to make positive lifestyle changes can be hard for anyone. For teenagers, it can be especially difficult when parents are the ones telling them to do it. But if they've fallen into unhealthy habits like vaping or alcohol abuse, change can be beneficial. Motivational interviewing is a form of therapy that creates a safe, non-judgmental environment for teens to establish their own goals and values and see how changing unhealthy behaviors can benefit them in the long run.

This series of articles comes from the Child Mind Institute, with most available in English and Spanish. Why might teens be resistant to therapy and how can parents and others to help them get the treatment they need? The articles explain how motivational interviewing can help teens gain the self-confidence to make important behavioral changes. To read more about motivational interviewing, and to connect with the articles in both English and Spanish, please visit CPIR's abstract.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Center for Parent Information and Resources | Your Central Hub for Parent Centers Serving Families of Children With Disabilities

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Finding the motivation to make positive lifestyle changes can be hard for anyone. For teenagers, it can be especially difficult when parents are the ones telling them to do it. But if they've fallen into unhealthy habits like vaping or alcohol abuse, change can be beneficial.

# data[].attributes.headline
Padlet about Bipolar Disorder and Depression

# data[].attributes.subject
Padlet about Bipolar Disorder and Depression

# data[].attributes.body
Self Made- presents descriptors as well as local resources

# data[].attributes.body
Made using Prezi

# data[].attributes.headline
Council for Children with behavior disorders

# data[].attributes.subject
Council for Children with behavior disorders

# data[].attributes.body
A great Resource for parents and educators on specific disabilities

# data[].attributes.body
Self-made presents descriptors and options for counselor's help

# data[].attributes.headline
School Counselor's Role in Treating Eating Disorders

# data[].attributes.subject
School Counselor's Role in Treating Eating Disorders

# data[].attributes.body
National Eating Disorders Association

# data[].attributes.body
Descriptors and Treatment options

# data[].attributes.headline
Lifetime Prevalence of Mental Disorders in US Adolescents

# data[].attributes.subject
Lifetime Prevalence of Mental Disorders in US Adolescents

# data[].attributes.body
A valuable study with great statistics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Dr. Kathleen Ries Merikangas, Ph.D, Ms. Jian-ping He, M.Sc., Dr. Marcy Burstein, Ph.D., Ms. Sonja A. Swanson, Sc.M., Dr. Shelli Avenevoli, Ph.D., Ms. Lihong Cui, M.Sc., Dr. Corina Benjet, Ph.D., Dr. Katholiki Georgiades, Ph.D., and Dr. Joel Swendsen, Ph.D.

Abstract

Objective

To present estimates of the lifetime prevalence of DSM-IV mental disorders with and without severe impairment, their comorbidity across broad classes of disorder, and their sociodemographic correlates.

Method

The National Comorbidity Survey-Adolescent Supplement NCS-A is a nationally representative face-to-face survey of 10,123 adolescents aged 13-18 years in the continental U.S. DSM-IV mental disorders were assessed using a modified version of the fully structured World Health Organization Composite International Diagnostic Interview.

Results

Anxiety disorders were the most common condition (31.9%), followed by behavior disorders (19.1%), mood disorders (14.3%), and substance use disorders (11.4%), with approximately 40% of those with one class of disorder also meeting criteria for another class of lifetime disorder. The overall prevalence of disorders with severe impairment and/or distress was 22.2%; (11.2% with mood disorders; 8.3% with anxiety disorders; 9.6% behavior disorders). The median age of onset for disorder classes was earliest for anxiety (6 years), followed by 11 years for behavior, 13 years for mood, and 15 years for substance use disorders.

Conclusions

These findings provide the first prevalence data on a broad range of mental disorders in a nationally representative sample of U.S. adolescents. Approximately one in every 4-5 youth in the U.S. meets criteria for a mental disorder with severe impairment across their lifetime. The likelihood that common mental disorders in adults first emerge in childhood and adolescence highlights the need for a transition from the common focus on treatment of U.S. youth to that of prevention and early intervention.

Keywords: Epidemiology, adolescents, mental disorders, National Comorbidity Survey, correlates

INTRODUCTION

There has been tremendous growth in the field of child psychiatric epidemiology over the past two decades. The results of numerous community surveys in specific regions of the U.S. ⁻ have shown that about one in every three to four children suffers from a mental disorder and that about one in ten has a Serious Emotional Disturbance, ⁻ with few affected youth receiving adequate mental health care. However, there has been a lack of empirical data on the prevalence and distribution of a wide range of DSM-IV mental disorders from a nationally representative sample of children or adolescents. Such information is necessary to establish resource allocation priorities for prevention, treatment, and research.

Based on the recommendations of the landmark Surgeon General's Report on Mental Health and the recommendations of a subgroup of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) National Advisory Mental Health Council, the NIMH established several research initiatives to address the lack of national statistics on mental health in children. Instruments for assessing mental health were added to two large national surveys including the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) to the National Health Interview Survey, and selected modules from the National Institute of Mental Health Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (DISC) Version 4 to the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. In addition to these measures, the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R) was extended to assess a broad range of DSM-IV disorders in a nationally representative sample of youth aged 13-18 years, referred to as the National Comorbidity Survey Adolescent Supplement (NCS-A). ⁻

The goals of the present report are: (1) to present the lifetime prevalence estimates of mental disorders and the proportion of disorders that are associated with severe impairment in a nationally representative sample of U.S. adolescents; (2) to examine the magnitude of overlap in the major classes of mental disorders; and (3) to describe the individual and familial sociodemographic correlates of these disorders.

Method

Sample and Procedure

The NCS-A is a nationally representative, face-to-face survey of 10,123 adolescents aged 13-18 years in the continental US. The survey was administered by the professional interview staff of the Institute for Social Research at the University of Michigan. The NCS-A was carried out in a dual-frame sample that included a household sub-sample and a school sub-sample., , The overall NCS-A adolescent response rate combining the two sub-samples was 82.9%. Comparisons of sample and population distributions on census sociodemographic variables and the school sample on school characteristics revealed only minor differences that were corrected with post-stratification weighting.

One parent or parent surrogate of each participating adolescent was asked to complete a self-administered questionnaire (SAQ) that contained informant questions about the adolescent's mental health. The full SAQ was completed by 6,491 parents. These recruitment and consent procedures were approved by the Human Subjects Committees of both Harvard Medical School and the University of Michigan. Once the survey was completed, cases were weighted for variation in within-household probability of selection (in the household sub-sample) and for residual discrepancies between the sample and the US population on the basis of socio-demographic and geographic variables. These weighting procedures are discussed in more detail elsewhere., Socio-demographic variables assessed in the NCS-A include age (in years), sex, race/ethnicity, parent education, urbanicity, and marital status of parents. A poverty index ratio, based on family size and the ratio of family income to the family's poverty threshold level, (≤1.5 poor, ≤3, ≤6, and > 6) was also included.

presents the weighted socio-demographic characteristics of the study sample. About half of the sample was male (51.3%) and the mean age was 15.2 years, with a larger proportion of youth aged 13-14 years (36.2%), and approximately equal distributions of youth aged 15 (20.5%), 16 (21.0%), and 17-18 (22.3%) years. The sample was comprised of 65.6% non-Hispanic Whites, 15.1% non-Hispanic Blacks, and 14.4% Hispanics. In terms of family characteristics, 84.5% of the sample had parents who had completed at least high school, 14.7% had a poverty index ratio at 1.5 or lower, nearly half of the sample resided in a metropolitan area, and 78.6% had parents who were married or cohabiting.

Table 1

Measures

Diagnostic assessment

Details of the diagnostic and risk factor measures are described by Merikangas et al. Briefly, a modified version of the World Health Organization (WHO) Composite International Diagnostic Interview Version 3.0 (CIDI), a fully structured interview administered by trained lay interviewers to generate DSM-IV diagnoses was administered to adolescents. Modifications to the CIDI involved enhancing the wording and appropriateness of the instrument for assessment of adolescents. Lifetime disorders assessed in the CIDI included mood disorders and episodes (major depressive disorder [MDD] or dysthymic disorder, bipolar I or II [BPD]), anxiety disorders (panic disorder, agoraphobia, social phobia, specific phobia, generalized anxiety disorder [GAD], posttraumatic stress disorder [PTSD], separation anxiety disorder [SAD]), behavior disorders (attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder [ADHD], oppositional defiant disorder [ODD], and conduct disorder [CD]), substance use disorders (alcohol abuse/dependence, drug abuse/dependence), and eating disorders (anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, and binge eating disorder). Parents (or parent surrogates) were mailed a self-administered questionnaire (SAQ) in order to collect additional information on adolescent sociodemographic characteristics, developmental background, mental and physical health, and other family- and community-level factors. Parents who completed the SAQ provided full DSM-IV diagnostic information about MDD and dysthymic disorder, SAD, ADHD, ODD, and CD, whereas those completing the abbreviated SAQ only reported on ADHD. Based on prior research that has documented the value of supplemental parent reports, , information from both the parent and adolescent were combined for major depression and behavior problems and classified as positive if either informant endorsed the diagnostic criteria. Definitions of all psychiatric disorders adhered to DSM-IV criteria and diagnostic hierarchy rules were applied for every disorder, with the exception of oppositional defiant disorder and substance use disorders. Psychiatric disorders derived from the modified CIDI showed good concordance with a clinical reappraisal sub-sample.

Impairment criteria embedded in DSM-IV required endorsement of some/a lot/extreme level of impairment or moderate/severe/very severe level of symptom severity. In order to more clearly identify disorders that were clinically significant, our definition of severe lifetime disorders used higher thresholds of impairment that required endorsement of "a lot" or "extreme" impairment in daily activities, or "severe or very severe" distress. Severe emotional disorders required both distress and impairment to be present, and severe behavior disorders (ADHD, ODD, and CD) required endorsement of symptom criteria by both the parent and the adolescent.

Statistical Analysis

All statistical analyses were completed with the SUDAAN software package and utilize the Taylor series linearization method to take into account the complex survey design. Cross-tabulations were used to calculate prevalence and comorbidity. Logistic regression analysis was used to examine demographic correlates of prevalence; regression models included all sociodemographic variables simultaneously, and adjusted odds ratios are presented. Age-of-onset curves were generated using the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis method. Multivariate significance tests were calculated using Wald Chi-Square tests based on coefficient variance-covariance matrices that were adjusted for design effects using the Taylor series method. Statistical significance was based on two-sided design-based tests evaluated at a level of significance of 0.05.

Results

Lifetime Prevalence

presents the lifetime prevalence rates of DSM-IV mental disorders by sex, age group, total DSM-IV disorders and disorders with severe impairment. Mood disorders affected 14.3% of the total sample, corresponding to 11.7% who met criteria for MDD or dysthymia and 2.9% for BPD. Females were twice as likely to experience unipolar mood disorders as compared to males, and somewhat more likely to experience BPD. The prevalence of all mood disorders increased uniformly with age, with a nearly two-fold increase from the 13-14 year age group to the 17-18 year age group. Severe cases of mood disorder (11.2% of the total sample) represented 74.4% of all MDD or dysthymic disorders, and 89.7% of all cases of BPD. The sex-specific rates for severe disorders (not presented in the table) maintained the same general patterns as were observed for the overall prevalence rates.

Table 2

Nearly one in three adolescents (31.9%) met criteria for an anxiety disorder, with rates for individual disorders ranging from 2.2% for GAD to 19.3% for specific phobia. All anxiety disorder subtypes were more frequent in females (the greatest sex difference being observed for PTSD). The aggregate category of any anxiety disorder was stable across age groups, but considerable variance was observed by disorder subtype. In particular, the prevalence of PTSD, panic disorder, social phobia and GAD showed modest but consistent increases with age. Severe anxiety disorders were present in 8.3% of the total sample, representing all individuals with panic disorder or agoraphobia, a moderate proportion of individuals with GAD (54.5%) or PTSD (30%), and only a small proportion of individuals with social phobia (14.3%), SAD (7.9%) and specific phobia (3.1%); yielding prevalence rates of 1.3% for social phobia, and 0.6% for SAD and specific phobia, respectively.

The prevalence of ADHD was 8.7%, with three times as many males being affected by this condition as females. The prevalence of severe ADHD was 4.2%, or approximately half of all cases in the sample. ODD was present in 12.6% of the sample (6.5% for severe cases) and 6.8% met criteria for CD (2.2% for severe cases). Although the rates of ADHD and ODD remained relatively stable by age group, rates of CD increased to a peak of 9.6% among the oldest adolescents.

Substance use disorders were present in 11.4% of the sample, corresponding to 8.9% of adolescents with drug abuse/dependence and 6.4% with alcohol abuse/dependence. These disorders were somewhat more frequent in males, and a five to eleven-fold increase in prevalence was observed across increasing age groups. The rates for severe substance use disorders were identical to those of the DSM-IV disorders because impairment criteria were embedded in the diagnostic definitions for these disorders. Concerning other conditions, 2.7% of adolescents had manifested eating disorders at some point in their lifetime. These disorders were more than twice as prevalent among females and demonstrated modest increases with age.

Finally, 49.5% of the total sample was affected by at least one class of disorder, but less than half had disorders with severe impairment (27.6%), and only 22.2% exclusive of substance use disorders. Approximately 20% of the sample (40% of all affected individuals) also met criteria for a disorder from at least one additional class. These comorbidity rates were similar for males and females. No age differences were observed for adolescents affected by one class of disorder, but comorbidity with additional classes strongly increased with age.

presents the age-specific incidence curves for each of the broad classes of lifetime mental disorder. Anxiety disorders occurred earliest with a steep slope beginning in early childhood, and leveling off after age 12. Risk was fairly low for mood and behavior disorders until early adolescence when it began to rise steadily. Substance use disorders appeared to have the latest age of onset with a steep increase in incidence after age 15. The estimated risk at age 18 was 17.6% for behavior disorders, 18.2% for mood disorders, 23.8% for substance use disorders, and 26.2% for anxiety disorders. The median age of disorder onset was 6 for anxiety disorders, 11 for behavior disorders, 13 for mood disorders, and 15 for substance use disorders (data not shown).

displays the proportion of adolescents affected by one or more broad classes of disorder among those with at least one DSM-IV disorder. A small majority of affected adolescents (61%) met criteria for disorders from one class only, with anxiety disorders being the most frequent condition to occur alone (35%) and smaller proportions having only behavior (14%), mood disorders (6%), or substance use disorders (6%). About one-quarter (25%) of adolescents affected by at least one class of disorder also met criteria for a disorder from one additional class, 11.0% were affected by three classes of disorders and 3% were affected by four classes of disorder.

Socio-demographic Correlates

presents the results of multivariate analyses of the association between individual and familial sociodemographic characteristics on classes of lifetime mental disorders in the adolescents. Mood and anxiety disorders were more prevalent among females in these multivariate analyses, whereas males had higher rates of behavior and substance use disorders. Rates of mood and substance use disorders were higher among older adolescents. There were few racial/ethnic differences in the major classes of mental disorders, with the exception of increased rates of anxiety disorders and lower rates of substance use disorder among non-Hispanic Black adolescents compared to non-Hispanic White adolescents, and higher rates of mood disorders among Hispanic adolescents compared to non-Hispanic Whites.

Table 3

With respect to parental characteristics, the prevalence rates of anxiety disorders, substance use disorders and behavior disorders were higher for respondents whose parents were divorced or separated relative to respondents of currently married or cohabitating parents. Rates of mood disorders were lower among children of parents who were never married compared to currently married or cohabitating parents. Parental poverty level and urbanicity were not associated with any of the classes of mental disorder. However, the most consistent association between parental characteristics and mental disorders in children emerged for parental education. Adolescents whose parents were not college graduates were at increased risk for all disorder classes.

The findings from multivariate analyses for these sociodemographic characteristics and classes of severe mental disorders (results not shown, but available upon request) were highly similar to those of all mental disorders, with limited exceptions. In particular, anxiety disorders were more prevalent in older adolescents, among 'other' ethnic minorities, among adolescents whose parents were not college graduates, and among adolescents whose parents were divorced or separated.

Two-way interactions for any significant main effects were tested for each class of disorder. After adjusting for family-wise experimental errors with a Bonferroni correction, no interactions were observed between individual and parental demographic correlates and anxiety or behavior disorders. There were four significant interactions for other disorders: (1) the prevalence of mood disorders was higher in White adolescents in homes with higher levels of parental education than that in Blacks and Hispanics; (2) rates of substance use disorders increased more dramatically with age for males than females; (3) sex differences in substance use disorders were largest for Blacks compared to other ethnic groups; and (4) increased rates of substance use disorders were observed among Hispanic adolescents whose parents were divorced, however, rates were decreased among Blacks whose parents were never married or divorced.

Discussion

These findings provide the first lifetime prevalence data on a broad range of mental disorders in a nationally representative sample of U.S. adolescents. The prevalence rates reported here closely approximate those of our nationally representative sample of adults using nearly identical methods, suggesting that the majority of mental disorders in adults emerge prior to adulthood. These rates are somewhat higher than those of prior studies, but within the ranges of estimates summarized in a meta-analysis of international community surveys of mental disorders in youth. In addition, the NCS-A provides a more comprehensive assessment of a wide range of DSM-IV disorders and subtypes than most previous studies. Despite the high prevalence rates, however, only about one in every four-to-five youths meet criteria for a lifetime mental disorder that is associated with severe role impairment and/or distress. The prevalence of severe emotional and behavior disorders is even higher than the most frequent major physical conditions in adolescence, including asthma or diabetes which have received widespread public health attention.

The finding that only about half of youth with a lifetime DSM-IV disorder report severe impairment confirms previous research demonstrating that a smaller proportion of youth with mental disorders actually have sufficiently severe distress or impairment to warrant immediate intervention. According to prior research, about one out of every ten youths with a current mental disorder fulfill criteria for Serious Emotional Disorder (SED) based on the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMSHA) definition (e.g., a mental health problem that has a drastic impact on a child's ability to function socially, academically, and emotionally). , While our study did not strictly assess all of the criteria for SED, our estimates of severe disorders were based on the full diagnostic criteria for DSM-IV disorders accompanied by severe impairment in major life roles.

Our data document the early onset of major classes of mental disorders. Among affected adolescents, 50% of disorders had their onset by age 6 for anxiety disorders, by age 11 for behavior disorders, by age 13 for mood disorders and by age 15 for substance use disorders. These findings closely approximate those of prospective studies of child and adolescent samples that have documented the incidence and progression of childhood mental disorders., ⁻ The early age of onset of anxiety has been well-established and our findings on specific subtypes of anxiety closely track those of prospective community-based research that reveal differential peak periods of onset of specific subtypes of anxiety. ⁻ Prospective studies have also shown that the average age of onset of major depression and dysthymia is between 11 and 14 years, with a steady increase in incidence across adolescence that continues through early adulthood. Our cross-sectional data reflect this increase with a near doubling of rates from 13-14 years (8.4%) to 17-18 years (15.4%). Also consistent with prior cross-sectional and prospective research, the median onset of behavior disorders is slightly earlier than that of mood disorders, with a later peak for conduct disorder than for oppositional defiant disorder. Finally, the later onset and steeper increase in rates of substance use disorders across adolescence has been repeatedly demonstrated, despite different prevalence periods and assessment methods.

About 40% of affected youth in the NCS-A reported more than one class of lifetime disorder, with mood disorders being the most likely to co-occur with other classes. Non-random patterns of comorbidity between discrete classes of mental disorders have been documented extensively in prior community samples of youth. ⁻ Future analyses of these data will investigate specific concurrent and prospective comorbidity patterns as well as their sociodemographic and clinical correlates.

In addition to providing prevalence estimates, the findings also confirm observations from previous U.S. and international investigations of adolescents concerning the association of sociodemographic characteristics and mental disorders. In particular, female adolescents were more likely than males to have mood and anxiety disorders, but less likely to have behavioral and substance use disorders. Non-Hispanic Blacks were less likely to have substance use disorders compared to Whites, a finding that is similar to prior community studies of adolescents and adults. The increased prevalence of mood and substance use disorders in older adolescents has also been observed in previous investigations, thus indicating the importance of prevention strategies for early and mid-adolescence. By contrast, the stability of certain anxiety and behavioral disorders across this same developmental period suggests that earlier interventions before puberty may be appropriate for many of these conditions.

The strong links between adolescent mental disorders and parental characteristics indicate the importance of the family context in the development of mental disorders. Our finding of a prominent effect of parental education on mental disorders has been well-documented for both child physical and mental health outcomes., Divorce was often associated with mental disorders in youth, particularly anxiety, behavior and substance use disorders. The mechanisms underlying the impact of non-intact homes on mental disorders in youth, including both biologic or genetic vulnerability, and indirect influences on disruptions in the home environment, warrant further study., , However, the significant interactions observed among several sociodemographic characteristics attest to the complexity of these associations. For example, increased rates of substance use disorders among Hispanic adolescents whose parents were divorced may reflect interactions of individual, familial and broader environmental influences that should be considered simultaneously in modeling the nature of risk and resilience in adolescent mental disorders., The lack of strong effects for some sociodemographic characteristics, such as poverty, may also be attributable to the multivariate statistical approach that adjusted for confounded variables.

The present findings should be interpreted in the context of several study-specific limitations. First, the cross-sectional nature of the survey limits our ability to document temporal ordering of mental disorders and putative risk and protective factors. Second, assessment of lifetime disorders is based on retrospective recall that is subject to numerous types of bias. Although we employed a number of methods to increase the validity of retrospective reports of age of onset, it is unlikely that we were able to completely correct for recall biases. A third limitation is that surrogate information was obtained only from one parent using a self-administered questionnaire rather than a direct interview, and only for a limited number of disorders assessed in the survey. The lack of prior evidence for integrating parent and child reports based on different modes of administration led us to apply an empirical approach based on previous research on cross-informant diagnostic estimates. In addition to study-specific limitations, a critical view is warranted concerning current diagnostic nomenclature more generally. Adolescence is a period of change and maturation in which emotional and behavioral difficulties may be common, and it is difficult to establish universally acceptable definitions of disorder or severity thresholds. The high comorbidity across classes of disorders also raises questions regarding the permeability of diagnostic categories and the plasticity of adolescent development. The pertinence of current and alternative developmentally-appropriate diagnostic criteria for adolescent mental disorders deserves careful attention and would benefit from continued debate.

Despite these limitations, our findings document the high prevalence of mental disorders in youth, and specify that just over one in four-to-five adolescents in the general population suffers from disorders that result in severe impairment. Considered with recent estimates indicating that the annual economic burden of mental disorders on the well-being of American youth and their families approaches a quarter of one trillion dollars, these findings underscore the key public health importance of mental health in American youth. The present data can inform and guide the development of priorities for future research and health policy by providing previously lacking prevalence estimates in a nationally representative sample of U.S. adolescents, as well as the individual, familial and environmental correlates of mental disorders. Prospective research is now needed to understand the risk factors for mental disorder onset in adolescence, as well as the predictors of the continuity of these disorders into adulthood.

Acknowledgments

The National Comorbidity Survey Adolescent Supplement (NCS-A) and the larger program of related NCS surveys are supported by the National Institute of Mental Health (U01-MH60220) and the National Institute of Drug Abuse (R01 DA016558) with supplemental support from Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF; Grant 044708), and the John W. Alden Trust. The NCS-A was carried out in conjunction with the World Health Organization World Mental Health (WMH) Survey Initiative.

This work was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the National Institute of Mental Health. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and should not be construed to represent the views of any of the sponsoring organizations, agencies, or U.S. Government.

Footnotes

Disclosure: Drs. Merikangas, Burstein, Avenevoli, Benjet, Georgiades, and Swendsen, and Ms. He, Ms. Swanson, and Ms. Cui report no biomedical financial interests or potential conflicts of interest.

Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

Contributor Information

Dr. Kathleen Ries Merikangas, Genetic Epidemiology Research Branch, Intramural Research Program, National Institute of Mental Health.

Ms. Jian-ping He, Genetic Epidemiology Research Branch, Intramural Research Program, National Institute of Mental Health.

Dr. Marcy Burstein, Genetic Epidemiology Research Branch, Intramural Research Program, National Institute of Mental Health.

Ms. Sonja A. Swanson, Genetic Epidemiology Research Branch, Intramural Research Program, National Institute of Mental Health.

Dr. Shelli Avenevoli, Division of Developmental Translational Research, National Institute of Mental Health.

Ms. Lihong Cui, Genetic Epidemiology Research Branch, Intramural Research Program, National Institute of Mental Health.

Dr. Corina Benjet, National Institute of Psychiatry Ramón de la Fuente, Mexico.

Dr. Katholiki Georgiades, McMaster University.

Dr. Joel Swendsen, National Scientific Research Center (CNRS), Bordeaux, France.

References

1. Costello E, Mustillo S, Keeler G, Angold A. Prevalence of psychiatric disorders in childhood and adolescence. In: Levin B, Petrila J, hennessy K, editors. Mental Health Services: A Public Health Perspective. Oxford: 2004. pp. 111-128. [ Google Scholar]

12. Department of Health and Human Services. Mental Health: A Report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration: Center for Mental Health Services; 1999. [ Google Scholar]

26. Department of Health and Human Services. Mental Health: A Report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration: Center for Mental Health Services; 1999. [ Google Scholar]

45. O'Connell ME, Boat T, Warner K. Preventing Mental, Emotional, and Behavioral Disorders Among Young People: Progress and Possibilities. Washington, D.C: The National Academies Press; 2009. [ Google Scholar]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Lifetime Prevalence of Mental Disorders in US Adolescents: Results from the National Comorbidity Study-Adolescent Supplement (NCS-A)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Dr. Kathleen Ries Merikangas, Ph.D, Ms. Jian-ping He, M.Sc., Dr. Marcy Burstein, Ph.D., Ms. Sonja A. Swanson, Sc.M., Dr. Shelli Avenevoli, Ph.D., Ms. Lihong Cui, M.Sc., Dr. Corina Benjet, Ph.D., Dr. Katholiki Georgiades, Ph.D., and Dr. Joel Swendsen, Ph.D.

# data[].attributes.body
Great information about anxiety in children for parents and educators

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
From Dr. Tamar Chansky Creator of Worrywisekids.org

# data[].attributes.headline
Problem in Practice Paper from Writing Course

# data[].attributes.subject
Problem in Practice Paper from Writing Course

# data[].attributes.body
Counselors do not have enough time to counsel the rising number of students with anxiety.

# data[].attributes.headline
Center for Parent Information and Resources

# data[].attributes.subject
Center for Parent Information and Resources

# data[].attributes.body
Great resource for parents
Gives concise information about serving children with disabilities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Finding the motivation to make positive lifestyle changes can be hard for anyone. For teenagers, it can be especially difficult when parents are the ones telling them to do it. But if they've fallen into unhealthy habits like vaping or alcohol abuse, change can be beneficial. Motivational interviewing is a form of therapy that creates a safe, non-judgmental environment for teens to establish their own goals and values and see how changing unhealthy behaviors can benefit them in the long run.

This series of articles comes from the Child Mind Institute, with most available in English and Spanish. Why might teens be resistant to therapy and how can parents and others to help them get the treatment they need? The articles explain how motivational interviewing can help teens gain the self-confidence to make important behavioral changes. To read more about motivational interviewing, and to connect with the articles in both English and Spanish, please visit CPIR's abstract.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Center for Parent Information and Resources | Your Central Hub for Parent Centers Serving Families of Children With Disabilities

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Finding the motivation to make positive lifestyle changes can be hard for anyone. For teenagers, it can be especially difficult when parents are the ones telling them to do it. But if they've fallen into unhealthy habits like vaping or alcohol abuse, change can be beneficial.

# data[].attributes.body
Quick overview of several disorders

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
characteristics of students with emotional disturbance

# data[].attributes.body
Reflection on a video about Anxiety