FishFinder scientific transparency

Trust begins with precise boundaries

See which concepts inform FishFinder, which claims still need research, and how any result should—and should not—be interpreted.

Evidence status: independent validation of FishFinder still needs to be completed and published
Evidence map

Three levels that must remain separate

Evidence for a concept, validation of an existing tool, and validation of this product are different questions.

What is well established

ADHD is not diagnosed with one game, questionnaire, or test. Developmental history, multiple observers, settings, and alternative explanations matter.

What informs FishFinder

The design draws on CPT literature, sustained attention, omission and commission errors, response time, and complementary motion signals.

What remains to be demonstrated

Reliability, age norms, cutoffs, sensitivity, specificity, and clinical value must be established in independent studies of FishFinder.

Relationship to IVA-2

Conceptual inspiration—not psychometric equivalence

IVA-2 is an integrated visual and auditory continuous performance test with its own administration protocol, norms, and reporting system. FishFinder is not a translated or gamified copy of that test.

Published IVA-2 sensitivity or specificity figures cannot be transferred to FishFinder. Any accuracy claim requires a direct, pre-specified study of FishFinder itself.

Validation roadmap

From usable experience to clinical evidence

Sequence matters: cutoffs should not be selected before data quality and reliability are understood.

  1. 01

    Safety and usability

    Evaluate instruction clarity, child and caregiver experience, fatigue, technical errors, and device performance.

  2. 02

    Measurement reliability

    Examine score stability and the effects of practice, environment, and device differences.

  3. 03

    Construct and convergent validity

    Compare FishFinder signals with established measures and parent or teacher observations.

  4. 04

    Screening validity

    Run a pre-specified prospective study against qualified assessment and report uncertainty, errors, and bias.

Responsible interpretation

What can the output say—and what can it not say?

Appropriate use

  • Observe performance patterns from that play session
  • Prepare questions for teachers and professionals
  • Consider the result alongside development and daily behavior

Inappropriate conclusions

  • Prove or rule out ADHD with one score
  • Start, stop, or change treatment because of the game
  • Label or rank a child against others
Selected references

A path for independent review

Read the original source when making decisions.

These references explain the scientific framework and boundaries; none is direct validation evidence for FishFinder.

Public health referenceCDC — Diagnosing ADHDNo single test and the need to consider similar conditions and multiple settings.Clinical guidelineNICE NG87 — ADHD diagnosis and managementA complete assessment by an appropriately qualified professional.Health technology guidanceNICE HTG729 — Digital technologies for ADHD assessmentDigital tools alongside standard assessment and the need for more research.Systematic reviewJMIR Serious Games Review (2025)Serious games for children with ADHD; not direct validation of FishFinder.Systematic reviewFrontiers — Serious gaming and eye-tracking (2026)Screening technologies and current evidence limitations.