Skip to content

Investigation of Strategies to Reduce the Impact of the Relative Age Effect in Kindergarten

Investigation of Strategies to Reduce the Impact of the Relative Age Effect in Kindergarten

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05142826
Enrollment
62
Registered
2021-12-03
Start date
2022-06-01
Completion date
2025-06-01
Last updated
2025-11-19

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

Keywords

ADHD, kindergarten, relative age effect

Brief summary

There is now clear evidence that children entering kindergarten, that are relatively young for the grade (e.g., born in the months immediately preceding the school entry cut-off) are at significantly more risk for receiving an ADHD diagnosis and being prescribed stimulant medication. These risks appear to be related solely to age of entry when other explanatory variables are controlled. This situation, termed the Relative Age Effecthas potentially serious consequences for kindergarten children (e.g., greater likelihood of being prescribed psychoactive medication to control behavior). The present proposal aims to develop a teacher intervention to attenuate the impact of the relative age effect on young kindergarteners with elevated ADHD symptoms, and test the correspondence between the hypothesized mechanisms and treatment outcomes related to ADHD (e.g., symptoms, impairment). Following intervention development and refinement, 60 children entering kindergarten in the fall, and young for the grade, will be randomly assigned to (1) Kindergarten as Usual (KAU); (2) a Relative Age Effect prevention intervention administered immediately; or (3) a Relative Age Effect prevention intervention administered mid-year. In the intervention groups, teachers will be introduced to the relative age effect, receive information on how to anchor behavioral ratings in developmental norms, and implement a positive behavioral support to support growth in the child across the kindergarten school year. Primary aims will be to demonstrate the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention approach as well as the ability of the team to retain young children in a longitudinal trial. Further, the hypothesized mechanisms (e.g., improved neurocognitive functioning; improved teacher use of positive behavioral supports) will be measured and correspondence to hypothesized outcomes (e.g., reduced ADHD symptoms and impairment) will be evaluated. Anticipated benefits include attenuation of any negative effects for children who receive intervention, and risks include breach of confidentiality and worsening of symptoms initially if an intervention is instituted. The knowledge to be gained is important as it could reduce untoward outcomes for the relatively youngest children in the grade.

Detailed description

The entry to kindergarten is one of the most memorable and important milestones in a child's school career. Positive and quality kindergarten experiences have been associated with meaningful outcomes sustained into adulthood including greater rates of college attendance/higher earnings. Kindergarten entry is one of the first educational transitions made by a family, and it may cause stress and present new challenges for children and families. Given the increased demands that are associated with school entry and the concerns parents may have about this developmental milestone, there are numerous popular press and policy recommendations (e.g., National Association for the Education of Young Children), as well as empirical papers, that weigh in on the appropriate age to start kindergarten. The transition to kindergarten is of particular concern for parents of children with ADHD, especially those relatively young for the grade. There is converging evidence suggesting that children who are young for their kindergarten class (e.g., they have a birthdate that falls within the months immediately preceding the cut-off date, typically August through November) are at increased risk for a range of negative educational outcomes including lower academic achievement, grade retention, social impairments, and ADHD diagnosis . These risks appear to be related to age of entry when other explanatory variables are controlled. Thus, these studies suggest that the robust evidence that children closest to an arbitrary cut-off date are disproportionally at-risk for negative social, behavioral, and educational outcomes is solely a consequence of educational policy - a phenomenon called the Relative Age Effect (RAE). Together, the consequence of these risks are 1.5x increased ADHD diagnostic rates and increased ADHD treatment with psychoactive medication for children relatively younger for their kindergarten grade . There are prominent, candidate mechanisms that may explain the differential risk for children with ADHD who are also young for the grade. First, if a teacher is basing behavioral expectations for children in the classroom based on the relatively older children in the class, children who are relatively younger and have behaviors that are attributed to having considerable delays, even in situations where the child is acting in a manner consistent with their chronological age. Over time, if teachers are issuing frequent commands/reprimands, a coercive process may develop. Second, given expected variability in neurocognitive processing at this age level, inappropriate demands may fail to facilitate, and potentially even slow, the development of executive functions. The present proposal aims to reduce functional impairments and ADHD symptom levels by investigating whether evidence-based school treatment for ADHD (e.g., positive behavior supports) coupled with teacher training on the RAE results in improved school functioning for children with elevated ADHD symptoms prior to the kindergarten year. Further, the potential mechanism for the impairment experienced by children with ADHD will be explored, by investigating whether the impairments are due to characteristics of the child (e.g., deficits in neurocognitive development), the classroom (e.g., teacher classroom management strategies), or both.

Interventions

BEHAVIORALRelative Age Effect Intervention

School-based consultation to establish a developmentally appropriate daily behavior report; teacher education regarding developmentally appropriate behaviors; teacher consultation to promote positive behavior supports.

Interventions and supports as provided through usual care

Sponsors

University at Buffalo
CollaboratorOTHER
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
CollaboratorNIH
Florida International University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)

Masking description

Observers are masked to group assignment of the participants

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
4 Years to 5 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* enrolling in Kindergarten * has a date of birth 4 months prior to the respective state cut-off for school entry * does not have an Individualized Education program for behavioral concerns * has not been retained in school or red-shirted by parents.

Exclusion criteria

* outside of the targeted birthdate range * diagnosed with autism, psychosis, or disruptive mood dysregulation disorder * taking psychoactive medication for mood, behavior, or inattention, * in a classroom with an already enrolled study participant.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Academic Performance Rating ScaleBaseline (Fall), 3 Months (Winter), 6 Months (Spring) and 12 Months (First Grade Follow-up)Teacher rating of academic productivity. Average scores range from 1.0 to 5.0 with lower scores indicating academic underperformance.
Disruptive Behavior Disorders Rating ScaleBaseline (Fall), 3 Months (Winter), 6 Months (Spring) and 12 Months (First Grade Follow-up)Average score for ADHD symptom ratings on the Disruptive Behavior Disorders rating scale Average score ranges from 0.0 to 3.0 with higher scores indicating greater impairment.
Impairment Rating ScaleBaseline (Fall), 3 Months (Winter), 6 Months (Spring) and 12 Months (First Grade Follow-up)ADHD impairment - teacher rating. Average score ranges from 0.0 to 6.0 with higher scores indicating greater impairment.
Student Behavior Teacher Response Observation CodeBaseline (Fall), 3 Months (Winter), 6 Months (Spring) and 12 Months (First Grade Follow-up)Number of disruptive behaviors; higher counts equal the presence of more classroom rule violations

Other

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of Children Who Were Prescribed Stimulant MedicationCollected at the end of the kindergarten school year, approximately 10 months from the start of study procedures.Dichotomous parent rating of yes or no for initiation of stimulant medication at the end of kindergarten
Number of Children Who Were Retained in KindergartenCollected at the end of the kindergarten school year, approximately 10 months from the start of study procedures.Dichotomous parent rating of yes or no for retained in kindergarten at the end of kindergarten
Number of Children Who Were Referred to Special EducationCollected at the end of the kindergarten school year, approximately 10 months from the start of study procedures.Dichotomous parent rating of yes or no for referral for special education at the end of kindergarten

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
School as Usual
School procedures as typically used and implemented. School as Usual: Interventions and supports as provided through usual care
20
Immediate Relative Age Effect Intervention
Relative age effect intervention administered in the Fall in school. Relative Age Effect Intervention: School-based consultation to establish a developmentally appropriate daily behavior report; teacher education regarding developmentally appropriate behaviors; teacher consultation to promote positive behavior supports.
21
Delayed Relative Age Effect Intervention
Relative age effect intervention administered after the Winter break in school. Relative Age Effect Intervention: School-based consultation to establish a developmentally appropriate daily behavior report; teacher education regarding developmentally appropriate behaviors; teacher consultation to promote positive behavior supports.
21
Total62

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicSchool as UsualImmediate Relative Age Effect InterventionDelayed Relative Age Effect InterventionTotal
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
20 Participants21 Participants21 Participants62 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
0 Participants1 Participants1 Participants2 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
2 Participants3 Participants6 Participants11 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
1 Participants0 Participants1 Participants2 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
8 Participants2 Participants3 Participants13 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
9 Participants15 Participants10 Participants34 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
7 Participants8 Participants13 Participants28 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
13 Participants13 Participants8 Participants34 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
EG002
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 200 / 210 / 21
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 200 / 210 / 21
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 200 / 210 / 21

Outcome results

Primary

Academic Performance Rating Scale

Teacher rating of academic productivity. Average scores range from 1.0 to 5.0 with lower scores indicating academic underperformance.

Time frame: Baseline (Fall), 3 Months (Winter), 6 Months (Spring) and 12 Months (First Grade Follow-up)

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
School as UsualAcademic Performance Rating ScaleFall (Baseline)3.51 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 0.83
School as UsualAcademic Performance Rating ScaleWinter3.17 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 0.55
School as UsualAcademic Performance Rating ScaleSpring3.15 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 1.03
School as UsualAcademic Performance Rating ScaleFirst Grade Follow-up (Fall)3.7 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 0.87
Immediate Relative Age Effect InterventionAcademic Performance Rating ScaleFirst Grade Follow-up (Fall)3.49 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 0.8
Immediate Relative Age Effect InterventionAcademic Performance Rating ScaleFall (Baseline)3.22 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 0.97
Immediate Relative Age Effect InterventionAcademic Performance Rating ScaleSpring3.5 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 0.81
Immediate Relative Age Effect InterventionAcademic Performance Rating ScaleWinter3.36 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 0.83
Delayed Relative Age Effect InterventionAcademic Performance Rating ScaleFirst Grade Follow-up (Fall)3.01 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 1.09
Delayed Relative Age Effect InterventionAcademic Performance Rating ScaleWinter3.34 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 0.94
Delayed Relative Age Effect InterventionAcademic Performance Rating ScaleSpring3.49 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 0.84
Delayed Relative Age Effect InterventionAcademic Performance Rating ScaleFall (Baseline)3.36 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 0.97
Primary

Disruptive Behavior Disorders Rating Scale

Average score for ADHD symptom ratings on the Disruptive Behavior Disorders rating scale Average score ranges from 0.0 to 3.0 with higher scores indicating greater impairment.

Time frame: Baseline (Fall), 3 Months (Winter), 6 Months (Spring) and 12 Months (First Grade Follow-up)

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
School as UsualDisruptive Behavior Disorders Rating ScaleBaseline Fall Assessment.8 score on the scaleStandard Deviation 0.51
School as UsualDisruptive Behavior Disorders Rating ScaleWinter Assessment1.33 score on the scaleStandard Deviation 0.83
School as UsualDisruptive Behavior Disorders Rating ScaleSpring Assessment1.34 score on the scaleStandard Deviation 0.91
School as UsualDisruptive Behavior Disorders Rating ScaleFirst Grade Follow-up1.19 score on the scaleStandard Deviation 0.58
Immediate Relative Age Effect InterventionDisruptive Behavior Disorders Rating ScaleFirst Grade Follow-up1.12 score on the scaleStandard Deviation 0.83
Immediate Relative Age Effect InterventionDisruptive Behavior Disorders Rating ScaleBaseline Fall Assessment1.12 score on the scaleStandard Deviation 0.8
Immediate Relative Age Effect InterventionDisruptive Behavior Disorders Rating ScaleSpring Assessment1.13 score on the scaleStandard Deviation 0.8
Immediate Relative Age Effect InterventionDisruptive Behavior Disorders Rating ScaleWinter Assessment1.15 score on the scaleStandard Deviation 0.7
Delayed Relative Age Effect InterventionDisruptive Behavior Disorders Rating ScaleFirst Grade Follow-up1.05 score on the scaleStandard Deviation 1.03
Delayed Relative Age Effect InterventionDisruptive Behavior Disorders Rating ScaleWinter Assessment1.28 score on the scaleStandard Deviation 0.85
Delayed Relative Age Effect InterventionDisruptive Behavior Disorders Rating ScaleSpring Assessment1.00 score on the scaleStandard Deviation 0.65
Delayed Relative Age Effect InterventionDisruptive Behavior Disorders Rating ScaleBaseline Fall Assessment1.03 score on the scaleStandard Deviation 0.72
Primary

Impairment Rating Scale

ADHD impairment - teacher rating. Average score ranges from 0.0 to 6.0 with higher scores indicating greater impairment.

Time frame: Baseline (Fall), 3 Months (Winter), 6 Months (Spring) and 12 Months (First Grade Follow-up)

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
School as UsualImpairment Rating ScaleSpring3.24 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 2.3
School as UsualImpairment Rating ScaleFall (Baseline1.48 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 2.01
School as UsualImpairment Rating ScaleFall (First Grade Follow-up)2.22 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 2.4
School as UsualImpairment Rating ScaleWinter2.48 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 2.15
Immediate Relative Age Effect InterventionImpairment Rating ScaleSpring2.19 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 1.58
Immediate Relative Age Effect InterventionImpairment Rating ScaleWinter2.43 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 1.43
Immediate Relative Age Effect InterventionImpairment Rating ScaleFall (Baseline2.25 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 1.84
Immediate Relative Age Effect InterventionImpairment Rating ScaleFall (First Grade Follow-up)2.44 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 2.06
Delayed Relative Age Effect InterventionImpairment Rating ScaleFall (First Grade Follow-up)1.86 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 1.94
Delayed Relative Age Effect InterventionImpairment Rating ScaleFall (Baseline1.84 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 1.71
Delayed Relative Age Effect InterventionImpairment Rating ScaleWinter1.7 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 1.66
Delayed Relative Age Effect InterventionImpairment Rating ScaleSpring1.57 Score on the scaleStandard Deviation 1.55
Primary

Student Behavior Teacher Response Observation Code

Number of disruptive behaviors; higher counts equal the presence of more classroom rule violations

Time frame: Baseline (Fall), 3 Months (Winter), 6 Months (Spring) and 12 Months (First Grade Follow-up)

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
School as UsualStudent Behavior Teacher Response Observation CodeFall (Baseline5 Frequency count of behaviorsStandard Deviation 4.27
School as UsualStudent Behavior Teacher Response Observation CodeWinter5.56 Frequency count of behaviorsStandard Deviation 8.12
School as UsualStudent Behavior Teacher Response Observation CodeSpring4.22 Frequency count of behaviorsStandard Deviation 4.02
School as UsualStudent Behavior Teacher Response Observation CodeFirst grade follow-up (Fall)3 Frequency count of behaviorsStandard Deviation 2.39
Immediate Relative Age Effect InterventionStudent Behavior Teacher Response Observation CodeFirst grade follow-up (Fall)3.88 Frequency count of behaviorsStandard Deviation 3.74
Immediate Relative Age Effect InterventionStudent Behavior Teacher Response Observation CodeFall (Baseline5.67 Frequency count of behaviorsStandard Deviation 6.2
Immediate Relative Age Effect InterventionStudent Behavior Teacher Response Observation CodeSpring4.36 Frequency count of behaviorsStandard Deviation 5.51
Immediate Relative Age Effect InterventionStudent Behavior Teacher Response Observation CodeWinter5.21 Frequency count of behaviorsStandard Deviation 7.77
Delayed Relative Age Effect InterventionStudent Behavior Teacher Response Observation CodeFirst grade follow-up (Fall)2.6 Frequency count of behaviorsStandard Deviation 3.53
Delayed Relative Age Effect InterventionStudent Behavior Teacher Response Observation CodeWinter5.75 Frequency count of behaviorsStandard Deviation 4.9
Delayed Relative Age Effect InterventionStudent Behavior Teacher Response Observation CodeSpring4.17 Frequency count of behaviorsStandard Deviation 3.74
Delayed Relative Age Effect InterventionStudent Behavior Teacher Response Observation CodeFall (Baseline7 Frequency count of behaviorsStandard Deviation 6.7
Other Pre-specified

Number of Children Who Were Prescribed Stimulant Medication

Dichotomous parent rating of yes or no for initiation of stimulant medication at the end of kindergarten

Time frame: Collected at the end of the kindergarten school year, approximately 10 months from the start of study procedures.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
School as UsualNumber of Children Who Were Prescribed Stimulant Medication0 Participants
Immediate Relative Age Effect InterventionNumber of Children Who Were Prescribed Stimulant Medication0 Participants
Delayed Relative Age Effect InterventionNumber of Children Who Were Prescribed Stimulant Medication2 Participants
Other Pre-specified

Number of Children Who Were Referred to Special Education

Dichotomous parent rating of yes or no for referral for special education at the end of kindergarten

Time frame: Collected at the end of the kindergarten school year, approximately 10 months from the start of study procedures.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
School as UsualNumber of Children Who Were Referred to Special Education1 Participants
Immediate Relative Age Effect InterventionNumber of Children Who Were Referred to Special Education2 Participants
Delayed Relative Age Effect InterventionNumber of Children Who Were Referred to Special Education3 Participants
Other Pre-specified

Number of Children Who Were Retained in Kindergarten

Dichotomous parent rating of yes or no for retained in kindergarten at the end of kindergarten

Time frame: Collected at the end of the kindergarten school year, approximately 10 months from the start of study procedures.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
School as UsualNumber of Children Who Were Retained in Kindergarten0 Participants
Immediate Relative Age Effect InterventionNumber of Children Who Were Retained in Kindergarten3 Participants
Delayed Relative Age Effect InterventionNumber of Children Who Were Retained in Kindergarten0 Participants

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026