Référence bibliographique 
Vergunst, Francis, Tremblay, Richard E., Galéra, Cédric, Nagin, Daniel, Vitaro, Frank, Boivin, Michel et Côté, Sylvana M. 2019. «Multi-Rater Developmental Trajectories of Hyperactivity-Impulsivity and Inattention Symptoms from 1.5 to 17 Years: A Population-Based Birth Cohort Study ». European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, vol. 28, no 7, p. 973-983.
Accéder à la publication
«The aims of this study [are] twofold. First, to map the development of hyperactivity–impulsivity and inattention symptoms from infancy to adolescence, and identify groups of children following elevated trajectories […]. Second, to identify early risk factors associated with high-symptom trajectories of hyperactivity–impulsivity, inattention, and both symptom categories concurrently […].» (p. 974)
«Data were obtained from the Quebec Longitudinal Study of Child Development (QLSCD) [...].» (p. 974) L’échantillon final est composé de 1374 enfants nés en 1997-1998 au Québec.
Type de traitement des données :
«This study found that approximately one-fifth of children follow relatively high symptom trajectories of hyperactivity–impulsivity and inattention, with roughly 11% following elevated trajectories in both symptom categories simultaneously. Hyperactivity–impulsivity symptoms broadly declined from 1.5 to 17 years while inattention symptoms remained constant. A range of perinatal risk factors were associated with following high-symptom trajectories from infancy to adolescence.» (p. 982) Furthermore, «[m]ale sex, prenatal alcohol exposure, low maternal education, non-intact family, maternal depression, difficult temperament, and low child IQ [intelligence quotient] were associated with high hyperactivity–impulsivity symptom trajectories from 1.5 to 17 years. Male sex, prenatal street drug exposure, early motherhood, low maternal education, maternal depression, and low child IQ were significantly associated with high inattention symptom trajectories. For children following high trajectories in both symptom categories, male sex, low maternal education, maternal depression, and low child IQ were significant in the final model.» (p. 979)