Search results
1 – 4 of 4Christopher Gibbins, Margaret D. Weiss, David W. Goodman, Paul S. Hodgkins, Jeanne M. Landgraf and Stephen V. Faraone
This is the first study to evaluate ADHD-hyperactive/impulsive subtype in a large clinical sample of adults with ADHD. The Quality of Life, Effectiveness, Safety and Tolerability…
Abstract
This is the first study to evaluate ADHD-hyperactive/impulsive subtype in a large clinical sample of adults with ADHD. The Quality of Life, Effectiveness, Safety and Tolerability (QuEST) study included 725 adults who received clinician diagnoses of any ADHD sub-type. Cross-sectional baseline data from 691 patients diagnosed with the hyperactive/impulsive (HI), inattentive (IA) and combined sub-types were used to compare the groups on the clinician administered ADHD-RS, clinical features and health-related quality of life. A consistent pattern of differences was found between the ADHD-I and combined subtypes, with the combined subtype being more likely to be diagnosed in childhood, more severe symptom severity and lower HRQL. Twenty-three patients out of the total sample of 691 patients (3%) received a clinician diagnosis of ADHD -hyperactive/impulsive subtype. Review of the ratings on the ADHD-RS-IV demonstrated, however, that this group had ratings of inattention comparable to the inattentive group. There were no significant differences found between the ADHD-HI and the other subtypes in symptom severity, functioning or quality of life. The hyperactive/impulsive subtype group identified by clinicians in this study was not significantly different from the rest of the sample. By contrast, significant differences were found between the inattentive and combined types. This suggests that in adults, hyperactivity declines and inattention remains significant, making the hyperactive/impulsive sub-type as defined by childhood criteria a very rare condition and raising questions as to the validity of the HI subtype in adults.
Details
Keywords
Zahirul Hoque, Kate Mai and Esin Ozdil
This paper has two purposes. First, it aims to explore how Australian universities used calculative rhetoric and practices through accounting numbers to persuade employees and…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper has two purposes. First, it aims to explore how Australian universities used calculative rhetoric and practices through accounting numbers to persuade employees and legitimize their financial recovery plans to alleviate the financial hardship caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Second, it aims to analyze how the accounting-based solutions were legitimized through a well-blended pathos, logos and ethos rhetoric.
Design/methodology/approach
Building on a rhetorical theory of diffusion, we employed a qualitative research design within all 37 Australian public universities involving Internet-based documentary analysis.
Findings
This study finds that in an urgent crisis like the fiscal crisis caused by COVID-19, universities again found rescue in accounting tools, in particular budgets, as a rhetorical device to justify their operational and strategic choices such as job-cuts, programs closures and staff pay-cuts. However, in this crisis, the same old accounting-based solutions were even more quickly to be accepted by being delivered in management’s colorful blending of pathos–logos–ethos rhetoric.
Research limitations/implications
While this study is constrained to Australian public universities’ financial responses, its findings have implications for university decision-makers and higher education policymakers across the globe when it comes to university management using calculative devices in persuading employees to work their way through financial hardship caused by an extreme health crisis-like COVID-19 pandemic.
Originality/value
This study adds more evidence that the use of budgets as a calculative tool continues to play a key role in organizations in the construction, mobilization and preservation of certain strategic and operational choices during volatilities. Especially, the same way of creating calculative-based solutions can be communicated via the colorful blending of different rhetoric to make it acceptable.
Details