A small pilot trial included 35 African American children aged 6 to 12 at one school in a poor urban Chicago community. All screened positive for ADHD or disruptive behavior problems, though four met criteria for no disorder on interview. Only one child took medication during the program. Children were randomly placed in a 10-week after-school exercise program (19 children) or a seated comparison program (16 children). Both groups also got homework help.
Most children stayed (86%), and attendance was 60%, about three days a week. On the main measure, parent ratings of everyday planning and self-control skills, the two groups did not differ. Both groups improved by a moderate to large amount. The exercise group showed a moderate edge on hyperactivity and a small edge on verbal memory. The seated group showed small edges on visual memory and defiant behavior. None of these group differences was reliable. In the seated group, children who came more often improved more on visual memory.
The trial was only built to test the main measure. With no untreated group, the gains could reflect growing up or simply taking part. Parent ratings covered only 13 to 14 children per group.
The authors suggest that clear rules, rewards and peer support in after-school programs, active or seated, may help these children take part and benefit, and that hyperactivity deserves a larger trial. Talk to a clinician about your own situation.
The numbers Stats and what the terms mean
The statistics behind the plain-language claims above.
- Bustamante, 2016: difference between groups over time in parent-rated planning and self-control skills (BRIEF GEC), F[1,22] = 0.00, P = 0.988, d = -0.01.
- Bustamante, 2016: difference favoring exercise on hyperactivity and impulsivity, d = 0.47.
- Bustamante, 2016: difference favoring exercise on verbal working memory, d = 0.26.
- Bustamante, 2016: difference favoring the seated program on visual working memory, d = -0.21.
- Bustamante, 2016: difference favoring the seated program on defiant behavior (ODD severity), d = -0.37.
- Bustamante, 2016: improvement within each group on most outcomes, d = 0.67 to 1.60.
- Bustamante, 2016: whether attendance shaped visual working memory gains differently by group, F[1,33] = 7.42, P < 0.05.
- Bustamante, 2016: link between attending the seated program and visual working memory gains, r = 0.72, P < 0.01.
- Bustamante, 2016: link between attending the exercise program and visual working memory gains, reported as r = 0.25, P = 0.34 in the abstract and r = -0.25 in the results text. What the terms mean:
- d shows how big a difference is. Roughly, 0.2 is small, 0.5 is moderate and 0.8 is large. A minus sign shows the direction of the change, not its size.
- F is a test of whether groups changed differently over time; a value near zero means they changed alike.
- P is the chance of seeing a result this large if there were no real effect; below 0.05 is usually read as unlikely to be chance.
- r shows how closely two things move together, from -1 to 1; 0 means no link.
Source: BUSTAMANTE E, DAVIS C, FRAZIER S, et al.. Randomized Controlled Trial of Exercise for ADHD and Disruptive Behavior Disorders. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise (2016). doi:10.1249/MSS.0000000000000891