Interesting to read Professor Anita Thapar's editorial, “Overdiagnosis of ADHD? Here we go again”. 🚨 Many of the arguments around moving beyond the underdiagnosis–overdiagnosis debate, recognising ADHD as a dimensional construct, and focusing on individual needs and functioning rather than diagnostic labels closely reflect what I discussed in my video last year. Sharing a few quotes from that video. “The rise in ADHD diagnoses has drawn polarising reactions. Critics argue that it reflects pathologising everyday behaviors, while proponents see it as a necessary recognition of a historically under diagnosed condition. And we know that the truth lies somewhere in the middle.” “ADHD is best understood through an evolving framework informed by neurobiology, behavior and the environment. It's not a single pathology, but a constellation of traits that exist along a spectrum.” “To move forward, to improve diagnosis and treatment, we've got to firstly, adopt a dimensional approach, viewing ADHD traits along a continuum rather than a binary diagnosis.” “Without a diagnosis, individuals are left struggling, leading to poorer educational, occupational and social outcomes.” “The challenge lies in balancing accurate diagnosis with a nuanced formulation that considers the individual's broader context.” “But note here, a diagnostic label on its own does not encompass the individual's broader needs.” “When we shift our focus from labels to formulations, we can address questions like, How does this individual's ADHD intersect with anxiety, depression or trauma? What environmental factors exacerbate or mitigate symptoms? What strengths can be leveraged to improve outcomes in this individual?” “We also need to think about behavioral interventions and environmental modifications.” “Remember, a diagnosis is more than a label. It's a tool to guide treatment and improve lives.”