Abstract
Background Evidence that mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) causes psychiatric problems in children has been mixed. Investigating this issue has been difficult due to the lack of representative longitudinal data on child mTBI that includes adequate measures of subsequent mental health symptoms and service use in young people.
Methods We used data from the ABCD longitudinal cohort study to examine the association between mTBI and psychiatric diagnoses, symptoms, and psychiatric service use in over 11,000 children aged 9-10 at i) baseline, and ii) with new cases of mTBI since baseline and psychiatric outcomes and service use at two-year follow-up. We also compared mTBI cases to a comparison group of participants with orthopaedic injury but without mTBI. Mixed-effects models were used and adjusted for demographic and social covariates, with missing data imputed using random forest multiple imputation. To account for baseline mental health outcomes, we used propensity-score matching to identify a comparison sample matched on potential confounding variables and baseline outcome measures.
Results When examined without adjustment for baseline mental health, both lifetime mTBI at baseline, and new occurrence of mTBI at two-year follow-up, were reliably associated with an increased risk of DSM-5 anxiety and behavioural disorders, mental health symptom scores measured psychometrically, and increased psychiatric service use. These associations were not present, or occasionally only minimally present, in the orthopaedic injury comparison group. However, controlling for baseline mental health using propensity-score matching resulted in no association between new incidence mTBI and psychiatric symptoms, diagnoses and service use, with the exception of parent-reported anxiety and conduct symptom scores in supplementary analyses.
Conclusion The association between childhood mTBI and subsequent psychiatric problems and service use may be largely explained by pre-existing mental health problems.
Introduction
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a leading cause of death and disability worldwide (Maas et al., 2022). Incidence is particularly high in young people – it is estimated that over 3 million children worldwide sustain a TBI each year, with 70-90% of all cases classified as mild (Kennedy et al., 2017; Sariaslan et al., 2016). The focus of research and clinical attention has traditionally been on neuropsychiatric outcomes following moderate and severe brain injury in children (Schachar et al., 2015; Stéfan and Mathé, 2016). More recently, there have been concerns that important neuropsychiatric effect of mild TBI (mTBI) are being missed by both researchers and clinicians, due to many milder child TBIs not resulting in contact with the healthcare system (Ritchie and Slomine, 2022).
However, evidence for paediatric mTBI reliably raising the risk of subsequent neuropsychiatric outcomes has been mixed. A meta-analysis by Gornall et al. (2021) reported that children with concussion subsequently experienced increased internalising symptoms, externalising symptoms, and overall mental health difficulties when compared with controls. A recent retrospective cohort study of 152,321 children aged 5-18 in Canada conducted by Ledoux et al. (2022) reported concussion was associated with a subsequent increased risk of developing any mental health issue, self-harm, and psychiatric hospitalisation, compared to those who had sustained an orthopaedic injury.
Conversely, other studies have reported more equivocal results. A systematic review by the International Collaboration on Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Prognosis found no clear difference in post-concussion symptoms between children with concussion and orthopaedic controls (Keightley et al., 2014). A study of 2,160 high-school athletes by Hammer et al. (2021) found depression scores increased slightly at the 7 day assessment point but had normalised from the next assessment point (3 months) to the end of the study (12 months). Sheth et al. (2023) reported a statistically significant but weak association between mTBI and changes in sleep and behaviour in 9-10-year-olds studied as part of the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) cohort study, albeit using cross-sectional data from the baseline sample.
One difficulty in interpreting these studies is that few adequately control for baseline levels of mental health outcomes that may account for reverse or shared causality for post-TBI psychiatric problems. This is important given evidence that prior mental health and behavioural problems are predictors of subsequent TBI in children, when defined as ADHD (Liou et al., 2018), Tourette syndrome (Chen et al., 2019) and any ICD-9 mental disorder (Liao et al., 2012). Furthermore, given that pre-injury mental health is strongly associated with post-injury mental health, controlling for pre-existing psychiatric outcomes is important when trying to better estimate the potential causal contribution of mTBI to the development of later psychiatric problems (Gornall et al., 2021).
Another important challenge is understanding the extent to which symptom measures adequately capture a meaningful impact of mTBI on the child and family. For example, qualitative studies have indicated that symptom measures may not sufficiently encapsulate the full range of changes to affect and functioning post-TBI (Valovich McLeod et al., 2017) or may mis-measure aspects of life that children and adolescents themselves value as important (Di Battista et al., 2015). One way of examining to what extent paediatric mTBI leads to caregiver concern regarding the young person’s mental health would be to examine help-seeking. mTBI may not lead to contact with clinical services in the majority of cases because of lack of necessity, but also potentially due to a lack of knowledge and stigma (Ritchie and Slomine, 2022). However, seeking service support for child mental health is reliably predicted by psychiatric severity and family stress (Hiscock et al., 2020; Verhulst and Der Ende, 1997), indicating that a change in help-seeking is a sensitive proxy measure of, in this cohort, parental concern about behavioural changes.
Understanding these issues at scale has been complicated, however, by the lack of representative data on child TBI, pre-existing and subsequent mental health symptoms, and service use in young people. This data has recently become available, however, in the form of the ABCD longitudinal cohort study (Feldstein Ewing et al., 2018; Volkow et al., 2018). Originally of 9-10 year-old children, it includes structured interview assessment of TBI as well as validated measures of psychiatric symptomatology, psychiatric diagnosis, and measures of mental health service use. The ABCD study involves yearly follow-ups and representative sampling, comprising over 11,000 children from the United States.
Consequently, this study aimed to examine the association between mTBI and psychiatric symptoms, diagnoses and psychiatric service use in a cohort of children aged 9-10 at baseline and subsequently at two-year follow-up, using the ABCD cohort data.
Although this study relied on observational data, we took several measures to account for potential confounding effects. Alongside examining cross-sectional associations at baseline, we also tested whether incident mTBI in children without prior mTBI was associated with changes in mental health during the 24-month follow-up period. We controlled for a range of evidence-based confounders and we included an orthopaedic injury comparison group of participants with a history of orthopaedic injury but without mTBI. Orthopaedic injury and TBI are associated with similar injury-related stress (e.g. pain, injury-related traumatic stress) and background social and behavioural predictors but only TBI is associated with damage to brain circuits and therefore a specific causal mechanism for neuropsychiatric outcomes (Kennedy et al., 2017; Ledoux et al., 2022).
Finally, we controlled for baseline levels of psychiatric outcomes. Adjusting for baseline level of the same variable used to measure outcome in has been discouraged in general linear models due to evidence that it can introduce spurious statistical associations across a wide range of causal inference scenarios (Glymour et al., 2005; Lydersen and Skovlund, 2021). Here, we use propensity score matching to tackle this problem (Benedetto et al., 2018). Regression models typically address confounding factors by incorporating potential confounders as covariates to adjust for their effect. Propensity score matching estimates the treatment effect by deriving the relationship between confounders and the allocation of treatment, and creating a comparison sample matched on potential confounders (Austin et al., 2021), allowing a comparison between samples to account for baseline levels of outcomes without covariate adjustment.
Methods
Dataset
The ABCD Study is a prospective, longitudinal cohort study of 11,876 children recruited from 21 research sites across the United States. The ABCD sample was recruited through geographically, demographically and socioeconomically diverse school systems, employing epidemiological sampling procedures to ensure variation in sex, ethnicity/race, socioeconomic status and urbanicity that mirrors the US population (Garavan et al., 2018). Participants were aged 9-10 at baseline and the study plans to track their development through adolescence into young adulthood (Garavan et al., 2018; Karcher et al., 2018). Exclusion from enrolment included a history of severe traumatic brain injury (TBI with loss of consciousness [LOC] greater than 30 min). This study used data from ABCD Data Release 4.0, which includes measures collected from participants at baseline (n=11,876), 1-year (n=11,225), and 2-year (n=10,414) follow-up visits. Approval from the relevant Institutional Review Boards was secured prior to ABCD data collection at each site, with all parents providing written informed consent alongside assent from the participants (Clark et al., 2017). Approval for the current study was granted by the University College London Ethics Committee (Ref: CEHP/2023/593).
Exposures
Lifetime mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) at baseline
The Ohio State Traumatic Brain Injury Screen - Short Modified (OTBI) (Corrigan and Bogner, 2007). At baseline, caregivers were asked to indicate whether the child had ever experienced a TBI in their lifetime. TBI was classified according to the following OTBI summary indices: Improbable TBI (no TBI/TBI without LOC or memory loss); Possible mild TBI (TBI without LOC but memory loss); Mild TBI (TBI with LOC ≤ 30 min); Moderate TBI (TBI with LOC 30 min to 24 h); Severe TBI (TBI with LOC ≥ 24 h). Following (Lopez et al., 2022), cases of moderate (n=9) and severe (n=3) TBI were removed to reduce the influence of small samples. TBI at each timepoint was categorised as a binary variable (i.e. yes/no), and only included ‘possible mild’ and ‘mild’ TBI cases.
Incident mTBI following baseline in children without prior history of mTBI
At each follow-up, caregivers were asked to indicate any new cases of TBI that had occurred since the previous study visit, using the Ohio State Traumatic Brain Injury Screen - Short Modified (OTBI). Children with incident mTBI without a prior history of mTBI were identified for the second analysis.
Lifetime orthopaedic injury at baseline
Caregivers completed a questionnaire regarding their child’s medical history and health services utilisation. A positive response to whether the child had ever visited a doctor due to a broken bone/fracture at baseline was used to identify children with orthopaedic injury but without mTBI.
New orthopaedic injury following baseline in children without a prior history of orthopaedic injury
New orthopaedic injuries since the previous study visit were measured at each follow-up by parent interview and children with new orthopaedic injury without a history of orthopaedic injury or mTBI were identified.
Outcomes
Child behaviour checklist (CBCL)
The CBCL is a widely used parent-rated questionnaire (Achenbach and Edelbrock, 1991) that has been used extensively to assess mental health problems following paediatric TBI (McCauley et al., 2012; Wade et al., 2020). It comprises 112 items that are aggregated into a total problem score and eight syndrome subscales (Anxious/Depressed, Withdrawn/Depressed, Somatic Complaints, Social Problems, Thought Problems, Attention Problems, Rule-breaking Behaviour and Aggressive Behaviour). For the purpose of this study, Total Problems scores were the primary outcome measure and were analysed at baseline and 2-year follow-up visit. The individual scales for externalising, internalising, anxiety, depression, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), conduct disorder and oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) scales at baseline and 2-year follow-up are reported as a secondary analysis.
DSM-5 Anxiety and Behavioural disorders
The caregiver-reported version of the Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorder and Schizophrenia for DSM-5 (KSADS-5). The KSADS-5 is a semi-structured interview that indicates the presence of DSM-5 psychiatric diagnoses in children and adolescents (Kaufman et al., 1997). Any current diagnosis of general, social or separation anxiety, panic disorder or obsessive-compulsive disorder were used to identify participants in the any anxiety disorders group. The any behaviour disorders category was created by combining any positive responses to current conduct or oppositional defiant disorder diagnoses. Depression and ADHD disorders were not examined by this study, as the variables had previously been removed from the 4.0 dataset due to measurement inaccuracies.
Psychiatric service use
Psychiatric service use was determined by the KSADS-5 background items questionnaire. Caregivers were asked to report on whether the child had ever received i) any mental health or substance use service support, ii) psychotherapy, or iii) medication for their mental health in their lifetime (at baseline) and since the last study visit (at every follow-up).
Covariates
Model 1
Caregiver reports of the child’s biological sex, age and ethnicity, and combined annual household income (measured as < $50,000, $50,000-$100,000 and >$100,000) were included in the first adjusted model as they have all been shown to be independent predictors of TBI and psychiatric problems (Li and Liu, 2013; Max et al., 2005; McKinlay et al., 2010).
Model 2
Included covariates in Model 1 but additionally included neighbourhood safety, parental mental health, family conflict and traumatic experiences were included as confounders as these have shown to be independently associated with both TBI and mental health (Lopez et al., 2022; Max et al., 2005; McKinlay et al., 2010). Perceived neighbourhood safety was measured using the modified Safety/Crime Survey at baseline, where the child was asked whether they agreed with the statement “My neighbourhood is safe from crime”. Parental mental health score was created by summing self-reported DSM-5-Oriented scales of depressive, anxiety, attention deficit and antisocial personality problems by parents of children in the cohort. Family conflict score was created by summing three responses from the Family Environment Scale, where the child was asked at baseline whether they agreed with the statements “we fight a lot in our family”, “family members sometimes get so angry they throw things”, and “family members sometimes hit each other”. Experiences of childhood traumatic events (e.g. being in a car accident or being attacked) were assessed by the KSADS-5 assessment of traumatic events. Propensity score model: sex, age, ethnicity, household income, traumatic experiences, neighbourhood safety, family conflict and baseline mental health were included as confounders. Each mental health outcome was adjusted for the same measure taken at baseline.
PSM Model
A matched sample was created that was balanced on all covariates in Models 1 and 2 and, in addition, to baseline levels of the outcome variable for each analysis.
Analysis
Individuals were coded into three groups (mTBI, orthopaedic injury and no injury). We completed separate analyses for i) baseline association mental health outcomes and TBI; and ii) association between mental health outcomes at age 11-12 and new mTBI / orthopaedic injury in the previous 24 months; each of which included a comparison analysis that examined the equivalent association using non-TBI orthopaedic injury as an exposure. In the follow-up sample, only participants with new mTBI / orthopaedic injury who hadn’t experienced prior injury at baseline were included.
The association between mTBI, orthopaedic injury and each mental health outcome was measured using mixed-effects models to account for a nested structure and included study site as a random effect, with unadjusted and adjusted (see covariates section) odds ratios (OR) or beta coefficients and associated 95% confidence intervals (CI). For propensity-score matching at two-year follow-up, new cases of mTBI and orthopaedic injury were matched to the no injury control group in a 1:1 ratio. Estimates were then generated from the matched cohorts using adjusted mixed-effect models (see covariates section) with OR/beta coefficients and associated 95% CI. The reference category for all analyses was the no injury group.
All analysis was conducted using R version 4.2.1 (R Core Team, 2020). Adjusted results are reported following multiple imputation. The missForest package in R was used to conduct random forest multiple imputation for missing variables. This method was used as it allows for simultaneous imputation of categorical and numerical variables and does not rely on distributional assumptions (Kokla et al., 2019; Shah et al., 2014). The level of missing data for psychiatric outcomes at baseline and two-year follow-up prior to imputation was visualised and can be viewed in Figures 1 to 4 of the supplementary material. The MatchIt package in R was used to conduct propensity score analysis from the imputed data (Ho et al., 2011). The full code for the analysis is available in full in an online archive: https://github.com/GraceRevill/pTBI-neuropsychiatric-outcomes
Results
Baseline demographics and descriptive statistics for the sample are shown in Table 1. At baseline, 450 (3.8%) children were reported to have ever experienced mTBI, whilst 1,604 (13.5%) children had experienced orthopaedic injury in their lifetime and 9,808 (82.5%) had experienced neither. In the 2 years following baseline there were 217 (1.8%) new cases of mTBI and 466 (3.9%) new cases of orthopaedic injury in children who had not experienced prior injury. The demographics and descriptive statistics for the sample at two-year follow-up did not differ significantly from baseline and are reported in Supplementary Table 1.
Baseline association between mTBI and psychiatric outcomes
At baseline, 16% of children who had a history of mTBI had received an anxiety disorder diagnosis compared to 8.7% in the orthopaedic injury and 8.9% in the no injury groups. 13% of children who had a history of mTBI had a behavioural disorder diagnosis, compared to 6.8% in the orthopaedic injury and 7.1% in the no injury groups.
As can be seen from Table 2, at baseline, lifetime mTBI was reliably associated with an increased odds of psychiatric diagnosis (KSADS-5 Any anxiety disorder and KSADS-5 Any behavioural disorder) and CBCL psychiatric symptoms, which was not the case for orthopaedic injury. This association remained, although attenuated after adjustment for potential confounders. History of mTBI was positively associated with all CBCL subscales, which was not the case for orthopaedic injury, as reported in Supplementary Table 2.
Unadjusted and adjusted associations between baseline history of mTBI/OI and lifetime use of any mental health/substance abuse services, psychotherapy or medication are reported in Table 3. At baseline, the odds of accessing outpatient services in children who had reported mTBI were higher than in those without any injury (unadjusted OR, 2.39, 95% CI 1.86–3.07; adjusted model 1 OR, 2.39, 95% CI 1.85–3.09; adjusted model 2 OR, 1.97, 95% CI 1.51–2.56). The odds of accessing inpatient services in children who had reported mTBI were not higher than in those without any injury (unadjusted OR, 1.71, 95% CI 0.63–4.63; adjusted model 1 OR, 1.92, 95% CI 0.69–5.34; adjusted model 2 OR, 1.22, 95% CI 0.42–3.59). The proportion and percentage of psychiatric service use across injury groups at baseline is reported in Supplementary Table 3.
Association between new mTBI and psychiatric outcomes at follow-up
At two-year follow-up, 13% of children who had experienced mTBI in the 24 months following baseline had an anxiety disorder diagnosis, compared to 7.8% in the orthopaedic injury and 7.5% in the no injury groups. 9.7% of children who had experienced mTBI in the 24 months following baseline had a behavioural disorder diagnosis at the two-year follow-up, compared to 6.7% in the orthopaedic injury and 5.1% in the no injury groups.
As can be seen in Table 4, without adjustment for baseline levels of outcome, new TBI was reliably associated with KSADS-5 diagnosis and CBCL symptoms at two-year follow-up, but orthopaedic injury was not, and the association with mTBI remained after adjustment for potential confounders. New mTBI was positively associated with all CBCL subscales apart from the ODD scale, unadjusted and Model 1 depression symptoms, Model 1 ADHD symptoms, and unadjusted conduct problems, whereas orthopaedic injury was only associated with unadjusted and adjusted Model 1 internalising symptoms scores (as reported in Supplementary Table 4).
The propensity score analyses that accounted for baseline levels of outcome reported no association between KSADS-5 anxiety disorders, behavioural disorders, or CBCL total symptoms scores, with all confidence intervals crossing 1, although with the lower confidence interval being exactly 1 in the case of KSADS-5 anxiety disorders. Supplementary analysis of CBCL subscales resulted in an association between new mTBI and internalising symptoms, due to increased anxiety symptoms, and externalising symptoms, due to increased conduct symptoms, but no other symptom subscales. Orthopaedic injury was not associated with any outcomes or subscale scores (Supplementary Table 4).
Table 5 reports the unadjusted and adjusted associations between the cases of mTBI / orthopaedic injury in the 12-24 months following baseline, and any mental health / substance abuse services, psychotherapy or medication that occurred within 12-24 months following baseline. Without accounting for baseline levels of outcome, in the 12-24 months following baseline, the odds of accessing outpatient services in children who had reported mTBI were significantly higher than in those without any injury. There were no new cases of mTBI and inpatient service use in the 12-24 months following baseline. The proportion and percentage of psychiatric service use across injury groups in the 12-24 months following baseline is reported in Supplementary Table 3.
Although the propensity score matched analysis that accounts for baseline levels of outcome reported an association between new mTBI and ‘psychotherapy and/or medication for mental health’, and between new mTBI and ‘Any mental health service use’, these associations were equally found in the orthopaedic control group, suggesting that this association was not specific to mTBI.
Discussion
Using data from a representative longitudinal cohort study of 11,876 children in the US, we report that poor mental health and higher levels of mental health service use were associated with i) lifetime mTBI at baseline, and ii) new mTBI at two years follow-up, when compared to a comparison group with orthopaedic injury. However, when baseline levels of psychiatric outcomes and service use are accounted for using a propensity score matched analysis, these associations largely disappear or appear equally in the group with orthopaedic injury suggesting they may be non-specific effects of injury. This suggests the association between mTBI and post-TBI psychiatric outcomes in children is largely explained by pre-existing mental health problems.
Although there were no overall associations with KSADS-5 diagnoses or Child Behaviour Checklist (CBCL) total symptom score with mTBI, there were some associations with the CBCL subscales in the supplementary analyses and the association with KSADS-5 anxiety diagnoses was on the borderline using conventional criteria for significance. Notably, although the overall scale total was not associated with mTBI, there were some associations with subscales. Parent-reported internalising and externalising symptoms, largely accounted for by anxiety and conduct problems, were associated with mTBI in our most rigorous analyses using propensity score matched samples. However, these appeared as only a handful of apparently statistically reliable associations among many null findings from the same scale that are at best reflected in the independent KSADS-5 diagnostic assessments as a borderline result. These may indicate false positives findings, or alternatively, sub-clinical changes, although it remains clear that there is not strong evidence for substantial causal effect of mTBI on psychiatric outcomes within the time period of this study.
A novel aspect of this study was the inclusion of pre- and post-injury psychiatric service use in children with mTBI. Studies from different countries have shown that only a minority of children with mental health problems are in contact with psychiatric services, and that those who do receive support tend to have more severe and persistent symptoms, making it an important measure of need (Bringewatt and Gershoff, 2010; Hansen et al., 2021; Raven et al., 2017). The evidence from this study suggests that injury, rather than mTBI specifically, was a risk factor for subsequent psychiatric service use. It is important to note that this study was based in the United States which does not have a system of universal healthcare coverage and where there are large numbers of children that remain uninsured with little access to mental health services (Bornheimer et al., 2018). The extent to which these results would generalise to other countries and healthcare systems is not clear and may suggest an under-estimate of healthcare use post-injury. Future studies exploring this association in countries with different barriers to service utilisation may provide different outcomes.
This study has several important strengths, including the incorporation of multiple psychiatric domains, including psychiatric service use, in a large representative sample of children with mTBI (Garavan et al., 2018). The incorporation of a 2-year follow-up allowed for analysis of mental health outcomes in children aged 11-12 who had experienced mTBI in the previous 24 months. By including an orthopaedic injury group, where many previous studies have only used an uninjured control group, we were able to examine the extent to which associations were mTBI specific. By including propensity-score matching of new mTBI cases in the 24 months following baseline with the no injury group, we were also able to control for baseline mental health to analyse the temporality and direction of the association between mTBI and psychiatric problems. Finally, by using a demographically representative cohort sample, we expect that these findings will be more likely to generalise to the general population in the United States.
However, it is important to note some limitations of this study. The comparison with orthopaedic injury, control for a range of evidence-based confounders including pre-injury mental health using propensity-score matching and examination of association with new onset mTBI during follow-up should have reduced the chances of a confounded association, but it remains possible the results were affected by unmeasured confounding. Propensity score analysis resulted in large confidence intervals which largely reflect the reduced sample size when the mTBI sample and the matched sample were analysed together. It is also important to note that lifetime mTBI and psychiatric service use were retrospective measures, which may have resulted in recall bias. The outcomes associated with lifetime mTBI in this study may also have been affected by age at injury (Li and Liu, 2013). For example, there is some evidence to suggest younger age at injury is more predictive of anxiety symptoms (Max et al., 2011; Vasa et al., 2002) whereas older age is predictive of depressive symptoms (Max et al., 2012). Age at injury may also affect potential cognitive mediators that are associated with emotional and behavioural regulation (Li and Liu, 2013).There is some evidence to suggest that multiple TBIs may worsen outcomes including neuropsychiatric symptoms, but this full lifetime TBI history is not available with the ABCD dataset (Lopez et al., 2022; Maas et al., 2022). ABCD is a longitudinal study that will last a minimum of 10 years post-baseline, therefore analysis of future study visits will allow for a longer follow-up period and analysis of mental health trajectories in the years following injury.
Overall, this study suggests that the association between childhood mTBI and subsequent psychiatric problems and service use may be largely explained by pre-existing mental health problems. However, it remains the case that children with mTBI are likely to present with higher levels of mental health difficulties, regardless of cause, and this remains an important comorbidity that clinicians should be aware of.
Data Availability
Data used in the preparation of this article were obtained from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive DevelopmentSM (ABCD) Study (https://abcdstudy.org), held in the NIMH Data Archive (NDA). The full code for the analysis is available in full in an online archive: https://github.com/GraceRevill/pTBI-neuropsychiatric-outcomes
https://github.com/GraceRevill/pTBI-neuropsychiatric-outcomes
Acknowledgements
Data used in the preparation of this article were obtained from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive DevelopmentSM (ABCD) Study (https://abcdstudy.org), held in the NIMH Data Archive (NDA). This is a multisite, longitudinal study designed to recruit more than 10,000 children age 9-10 and follow them over 10 years into early adulthood. The ABCD Study® is supported by the National Institutes of Health and additional federal partners under award numbers U01DA041048, U01DA050989, U01DA051016, U01DA041022, U01DA051018, U01DA051037, U01DA050987, U01DA041174, U01DA041106, U01DA041117, U01DA041028, U01DA041134, U01DA050988, U01DA051039, U01DA041156, U01DA041025, U01DA041120, U01DA051038, U01DA041148, U01DA041093, U01DA041089, U24DA041123, U24DA041147. A full list of supporters is available at https://abcdstudy.org/federal-partners.html. A listing of participating sites and a complete listing of the study investigators can be found at https://abcdstudy.org/consortium_members/. ABCD consortium investigators designed and implemented the study and/or provided data but did not necessarily participate in the analysis or writing of this report. This manuscript reflects the views of the authors and may not reflect the opinions or views of the NIH or ABCD consortium investigators. The ABCD data repository grows and changes over time. The ABCD data used in this report came from https://doi.org/10.15154/mpdm-9w22
Footnotes
Supplemental files have been updated.