UI/UX Case Study

Designing Attenly — A Child-Centric ADHD Screening App

A collaborative screening tool for parents and teachers to enable early recognition of ADHD symptoms in children aged 6-12, supporting timely professional intervention.

Role

Freelance Product Designer
Research, Concept Development & Visual Design

Timeline

8 Weeks

Methods

Literature Review, Contextual Inquiry, Surveys, Interviews

Tools

Figma, FigJam, Adobe Illustrator, Adobe Photoshop, Notion, Zotero, Canva

The Challenge

ADHD often goes unidentified in early childhood, despite symptoms appearing between ages 6-12

Across global education and pediatric systems, ADHD frequently goes unrecognized despite symptoms commonly emerging in early childhood. While early recognition is critical for academic, emotional and social outcomes, delayed identification remains widespread. A key challenge is that early ADHD symptoms often overlap with typical childhood behaviours, making it difficult for caregivers to distinguish between normal development and clinically significant concerns.

It was a client project. I chose this project because it sits at the intersection of healthcare, education and behaviour-led design, where early intervention can significantly change outcomes. ADHD is often missed in its early stages due to limited awareness and lack of accessible screening tools. This project allowed me to explore how research-driven design can support early awareness and enable timely professional intervention.

Process Overview

Research-Driven Design Process

Design Brief

Divergence

Understanding the Brief & Defining the scope

Literature Review

Contextual Inquiry

Transformation

Journey Mapping & Personas, Affinity Mapping

Synthesising insights & Ideation

Convergence

App Information Architecture and Wireframes

Brand Identity & UI Design

Prototyping

Testing

Final Interface

Understanding the Brief

Understanding the brief

ADHD often goes unrecognized in early childhood due to symptom overlap with normal behavior. Although early identification improves academic, emotional and social outcomes, caregivers struggle to distinguish clinically significant patterns, revealing a need for clearer, supportive early-screening tools

Line of inquiry

- What factors contribute to ADHD going unrecognized in early childhood and who are the stakeholders and how do they perceive and interpret early symptoms that often resemble typical behaviours?

- Are there any social, awareness or systemic barriers which lead to ADHD going unnoticed or ignored.

- And how do varying perspectives influence who feels responsible for identifying potential signs and initiating early screening in the first place?

Secondary Research

Literature Review

Behaviour appears developmentally typical

Early inattention, hyperactivity, and emotional variability resemble normal childhood behaviour, making impairment difficult to judge. (Wolraich et al., 2019)

Context-dependent reporting

Parents and teachers often report symptoms differently across settings, leading to hesitation and delayed screening. (De Los Reyes & Kazdin, 2005)

Less disruptive symptoms overlooked

Inattentive presentations are less likely to trigger concern because they cause fewer behavioural disruptions. (Willcutt et al., 2012)

Comorbidity obscures identification

Anxiety, mood, or learning difficulties may mask ADHD or be addressed first. (Cortese et al., 2022)

Systemic and social barriers

Stigma, limited awareness, insufficient screening time, and poor coordination between schools and healthcare delay identification. (Visser et al., 2015; Wolraich et al., 2019)

Clinical implication

ADHD frequently co-occurs with depression, reinforcing the need for early, routine screening that also considers emotional symptoms. (Cortese et al., 2022; Garcia-Argibay et al., 2024)

Primary Research

Stakeholder & Ecosystem Mapping

Child age 6–12

Parents / Primary Caregivers

Home context, daily observations

Class Teacher

Classroom behavior, academic tracking

Family Doctor

First medical point of contact

School Administrator

Policy, support systems

Developmental Pediatricians

Specialist assessment

Child Psychologists

Behavioral evaluation

Psychiatrists

Diagnosis & medication

Behavioral Therapists

Intervention strategies

Occupational Therapists

Sensory & motor support

Subject Teachers

Cross-subject observations

School Counselors

Emotional support

Special Educators

Resource teachers

Tuition / Coaching Centers

After-school learning context

Extended Family

Generational views on behavior

Peer Parents

Community comparison & support

Online Forums & WhatsApp Groups

Informal information exchange

Social Media & Misinformation

Cultural beliefs, stigma

Education Boards

Curriculum & inclusion policies

Insurance Systems

Coverage for assessments

School Inclusion Policies

Accommodation frameworks

Healthcare Policy Bodies

Standards & guidelines

Primary Care Clinics

First screening access point

Contextual Enquiry

Methods Used

Field Visits

Classrooms: Attention demands, behavioral expectations, reporting mechanisms
Homes: Parental interpretation, coping strategies, normalization or concern
Primary care settings: Time-limited consultations, screening workflows, referral decisions
School-clinic coordination: Information handoff and follow-up gaps

Stakeholder Interviews (Semi-Structured)

8 teachers
10 parents
2 psychologists

Goals: Understand challenges, expectations, emotional pressures.

Surveys

35 parents
32 teachers
4 psychologists

Goals: Measure awareness, common misconceptions, readiness to use a screening tool.

Research Goals

ADHD awareness in parents Parents' mental models Teachers' pain points "Normal" vs "concerning" behavior Screening action triggers Responsibility gaps Time, stigma & tool constraints

Key Findings

Primary Research Insights

Parents

Sample size: 35

76% Struggle to tell ADHD apart from "normal energetic behavior."

63% Fear social stigma associated with seeking psychiatric help.

58% Feel guilty or anxious when reading about symptoms online.

82% Want a non-judgmental, simple way to understand behaviors.

70% Prefer a handy tool that "just screens, not diagnoses."

Teachers

Sample size: 32

68% Report behaviour concerns earlier than parents.

54% Hesitate to share concerns due to fear of offending parents.

72% Want a standardized tool for rating attention and activity levels.

90% Suggest collaborating with parents for screening.

Psychologists

Sample size: 4

Stress the need for use of validated tools (Vanderbilt & CES-DC)

Combined reporting (parent + teacher) for more accurate screening

Suggest making non-diagnostic modality for early screening

Research Synthesis

Research Gigamap

User Research

Journey Mapping, Personas & Affinity Mapping

→ Scroll to explore

Observe

Manage in Class

Escalate (Late)

After Escalation

User Actions

Notices repeated disruptions; quiet inattention often missed

Uses reminders, seating changes, redirection

Mentions concern only after grades drop

Suggests “monitoring” or informal discussion

Thoughts

“Is this normal kid behavior?”

“I’ll handle it myself”

“Is this ADHD or just effort?”

“I hope parents take this seriously”

Pain Points

No clear threshold

No checklist or system

Fear of mislabeling

No structured next step

Opportunities

Early signals

Lightweight screening

Shared language

Clear escalation workflow

Manages a large classroom and relies on experience and intuition to handle behavioral challenges.

Notices disruption before inattention
Uses classroom strategies before referrals
Unsure when to escalate concerns

No standardized screening tools
Time pressure and unclear responsibility

→ Scroll to explore

Notice

Normalize / Explain Away

Seek Clarity

Decide Next Steps

User Actions

Observes distractibility, emotional swings

Blames screens, stress, parenting

Talks to teacher or searches online

Hesitates to approach doctor or school

Thoughts

“Something feels off”

“All kids are like this”

“Who should I trust?”

“Will this label harm my child?”

Pain Points

Stigma

Conflicting narratives

No guidance

Fear of medication

Opportunities

Normalize early consultation

Reframe ADHD

Clear first step

Non-diagnostic but suggestive tools

Wants to support her child but is overwhelmed by conflicting information, stigma around ADHD and fear of labeling or medication.

Normalizes early symptoms
Searches online before seeking help
Hesitant to initiate formal screening
Wants clarity, not diagnostic labels

Fear of judgement or long-term records
No clear first step or guidance
Conflicting opinions from school and doctors

→ Scroll to explore

Classroom Experience

Feedback Loop

Assessment Setting

After Assessment

User Actions

Struggles to focus or sit still

Receives repeated corrections

Waits, fills forms indirectly

Behavior discussed without child

Thoughts

“Why is this hard?”

“I’m always in trouble”

“What is happening?”

“Is something wrong with me?”

Pain Points

No explanation

Negative reinforcement

Adult-only language

Emotional needs sidelined

Opportunities

Child-inclusive tools

Strength-based framing

Short, engaging screening

Emotional validation

Curious, imaginative and verbally expressive, but struggles with sustained attention, emotional regulation and task completion — especially in structured classroom settings.

Gets distracted easily; often “zones out”
Reacts emotionally when corrected
Performs well in areas of interest
Struggles with routine/monotonous tasks

Feels “different” but doesn’t understand why
Receives negative feedback more than guidance
Emotional struggles are unnoticed or misinterpreted

→ Scroll to explore

Intake

Discussion

Screening

Follow-Up

User Actions

Addresses parent-raised concerns only

Hesitates to label

Mentions Vanderbilt briefly

Refers late or follow-up missed

Thoughts

“Limited time”

“Don’t overdiagnose”

“This should be handled elsewhere”

“Parents will follow up”

Pain Points

Time Limits

Unclear thresholds

Tools not explained

No tracking

Opportunities

Pre-visit screening

Standard protocols

Integrated tools

Automated follow-ups

First medical point of contact for most families, managing a high patient load with limited consultation time. Approaches diagnosis cautiously to avoid premature labeling.

Focuses on immediate physical concerns first
Discusses ADHD only if parents raise it
Mentions screening tools briefly without detailed explanation
Prefers to “wait and watch” before referring

Short consultation windows (10–12 minutes)
Incomplete input from teachers and parents
Fear of over-diagnosis or parental pushback

→ Scroll to explore

Waiting & Intake

Assessment

Interpretation

Feedback

User Actions

Parents fill repeated forms

Uses varied tools

Separates attention & mood

Shares results late

Thoughts

“System is overloaded”

“Which tool fits?”

“These overlap”

“This is a lot for parents”

Pain Points

Long waits

Inconsistency

Siloed findings

Parent confusion

Opportunities

Unified intake

Standardized tools

Combined screening

Clear explanations

Works with limited time and resources, balancing diagnostic accuracy with system constraints.

Uses multiple assessment tools
Addresses attention and mood separately
Presents findings cautiously

Inconsistent referrals
Parents overwhelmed by process
Fragmented information from schools and clinics

Primary & Secondary Research Insights

Parents

Teachers

Psychologists

Primary Care Physicians

Secondary Insights

When I search symptoms online, everything sounds scary and overwhelming.

parent survey

I feel guilty thinking something might be wrong with my child.

parent interview

I don’t know if my child’s energy is normal or if it’s something I should worry about.

parent survey

I thought ADHD only meant hyperactivity; I didn’t know inattentive type existed.

parent survey

I worry about the stigma — people judge children so quickly.

parent interview

It’s hard to observe their behavior objectively. I tend to see it emotionally.

parent interview

I want something simple that tells me if I should seek help.

parent survey

I want to understand the behaviors without feeling attacked.

parent interview

I want a tool that helps both me and the teacher be on the same page.

parent survey

Some parents are not aware of learning and hyperactivity disorders like ADHD.

teacher interview

I often notice attention deficits before parents do.

teacher interview

Some behavior only shows in structured environments like classrooms.

teacher survey

I need a neutral tool to communicate what I’m seeing.

teacher interview

Parents get defensive when I raise concerns.

teacher interview

I don’t have time for long assessments.

teacher survey

I need structured questions that reflect the real classroom behavior.

teacher interview

A scoring system would make it easier to show patterns over time.

teacher survey

Vanderbilt aligns with DSM criteria and works well when both parent and teacher complete it.

psychologist interview

Parent-teacher discrepancies are expected; combined data is far more accurate.

psychologist interview

CES-DC is one of the few tools validated for childhood depressive symptoms at this age.

psychologist interview

Vanderbilt is what we already use in clinics — it’s familiar.

psychologist interview

SNAP-IV is easy but not comprehensive enough for nuanced screening.

psychologist interview

Parents usually come to me after school raises concerns.

PCP interview

A combined report from parent and teacher saves me a lot of consultation time.

PCP interview

There is a need to create awareness. So many unaware parents come to me.

PCP interview

Parents complain about their child being stigmatized at school.

PCP interview

I need structured screening before referring to specialists.

PCP interview

Research shows 30–50% discrepancy between parent and teacher ratings.

literature review

Combining informants significantly improves screening accuracy (De Los Reyes & Kazdin, 2005).

literature review

Vanderbilt includes symptom impairment questions — others often don’t.

literature review

CES-DC is validated for ages 6–17 and simple enough for non-clinical use.

literature review

Conners-3 and BASC-3 require expert training and are not suitable for self-administered digital use.

literature review

Vanderbilt’s scoring maps well to digital automation.

literature review

CES-DC uses straightforward frequency-based scoring ideal for mobile UI.

literature review

Both are freely available for non-commercial use removing licensing barriers.

literature review

Iteration 1 — Identifying Themes for each Stakeholder Group

Parents

Teachers

Psychologists

Primary Care Physicians

Secondary Insights

What is ADHD? Never heard that before.

awareness

I don’t know if my child’s energy is normal or if it’s something I should worry about.

awareness

When I search symptoms online, everything sounds scary and overwhelming.

awareness

I thought ADHD only meant hyperactivity; I didn’t know inattentive type existed.

awareness

What if teachers think I’m a bad parent?

stigma

I worry about the stigma — people judge children so quickly.

stigma

I feel guilty thinking something might be wrong with my child.

stigma

It’s hard to observe their behavior objectively. I tend to see it emotionally.

observation

I don’t know what exactly teachers observe at school.

communication

I want something simple that tells me if I should seek help.

tools

If a test is standardised, I’ll trust it more than random blogs.

tools

I want to understand the behaviors without feeling attacked.

communication

I want a tool that helps both me and the teacher be on the same page.

tools

Some parents are not aware of learning and hyperactivity disorders like ADHD.

awareness

I often notice attention deficits before parents do.

observation

Some behavior only shows in structured environments like classrooms.

observation

I need a neutral tool to communicate what I’m seeing.

tools

Parents get defensive when I raise concerns.

stigma

I don’t have time for long assessments.

workflow

If the tool is confusing, I can’t use it during a busy school day.

workflow

I need structured questions that reflect the real classroom behavior.

tools

A scoring system would make it easier to show patterns over time.

tools

I want the tool to differentiate between occasional misbehavior vs consistent symptoms.

tools

Vanderbilt aligns with DSM criteria and works well when both parent and teacher complete it.

validation

Parent-teacher discrepancies are expected; combined data is far more accurate.

validation

CES-DC is one of the few tools validated for childhood depressive symptoms at this age.

co-morbidity

Vanderbilt is what we already use in clinics — it’s familiar.

adoption

SNAP-IV is easy but not comprehensive enough for nuanced screening.

tools

Conners and BASC require licensing and are too long for primary care.

tools

Screening tools must not imply diagnosis.

ethics

Users need clear, non-judgmental feedback with next steps.

communication

Consistency across informants improves early identification.

validation

Parents usually come to me after school raises concerns.

referral

A combined report from parent and teacher saves me a lot of consultation time.

tools

There is a need to create awareness. So many unaware parents come to me.

awareness

Parents complain about their child being stigmatized at school.

stigma

I need structured screening before referring to specialists.

workflow

Research shows 30–50% discrepancy between parent and teacher ratings.

literature

Combining informants significantly improves screening accuracy (De Los Reyes & Kazdin, 2005).

literature

Vanderbilt includes symptom impairment questions — others often don’t.

literature

CES-DC is validated for ages 6–17 and simple enough for non-clinical use.

literature

Conners-3 and BASC-3 require expert training and are not suitable for self-administered digital use.

literature

Vanderbilt’s scoring maps well to digital automation.

literature

CES-DC uses straightforward frequency-based scoring ideal for mobile UI.

literature

Both are freely available for non-commercial use removing licensing barriers.

literature

Clustering Themes

Awareness & Knowledge Gaps

Parents are not aware about Hyperactivity & Inattention Disorders like ADHD

Teachers know general but lack specialized knowledge

Parents confuse ADHD with lack of motivation

Both groups misidentified normal childhood symptoms as ADHD

Academic early childhood behavioral issues hard to differentiate from symptoms

Not enough educational resources available for stakeholders

Barriers & Stigma

Parents feel guilt, fear, anxiety

Stigma prevents early action

Teachers fear upsetting parents

ADHD & Depression are co-morbid

Depression can mimic or mask ADHD symptoms

Co-occurring conditions need simultaneous screening

Communication Breakdowns

Parents and teachers lack a shared language to discuss concerns

PCPs need structured reports

Discrepancies in behavioral observations across settings

Reports don’t reach parents in understandable format

Practical Workflow Constraints

Teachers lack time

Parents need clarity

Tools must be short, simple, accessible

Suitability of Screening Tools

Vanderbilt fits DSM criteria and is designed for teacher settings

CES-DC validated for young children

Alternatives are lacking; few short screening options available

Synthesis

Synthesising & Ideation

ADHD is often missed early due to symptom overlap with normal childhood behavior and inconsistent interpretation across home and school contexts.

Contextual inquiry revealed fragmented observations, unclear ownership of screening, and lack of shared documentation between parents, teachers and clinicians.

Literature highlights frequent ADHD comorbidity with mood disorders, increasing the risk of missed or delayed identification.

Standardized, validated tools (Vanderbilt for ADHD and CES-DC for depressive symptoms) address variability and capture co-occurring risks.

A digital, low-cost screening solution can enable joint parent-teacher input, immediate next-step recommendations, and scalable adoption.

Such a tool serves as a first, non-diagnostic step, supporting early recognition before formal clinical evaluation.

Envisioned an ADHD & Depression screening app for parent-teacher input and validated the idea with the stakeholders.

Ideation

Crazy 8

Classroom Observation Tool

Hits data capture + Doesn’t support diagnosis

Parent Support Companion + Data Capture + Expert Payoff Insights

Helps immediate classroom management + Low-tech & scalable

Awareness Workshops + Resources

Needs verified doctors + Higher institutional cost. Empathy + belonging + accelerates professional help

Gamified Screening Tool

Easy to validate clinically + requires long iterative research. Data-driven & engaging + standardized

CRAZY 8

8 rapid ideation concepts

Observe, Model & Activity Exercise Insights

Continuous tracking + Supports narrative over score-based approach. High scaffolding impact

Validated Screening Test for Children

Personalized insights + Data-driven screening & tracking. Requires more data first + objective vs screening

Wearable + Sensory Monitor

Hardware cost + Not useful without prior screening baseline. Continuous tracking + Supports objective data

ADHD Parent Community App

First step before clinical assessment. Dependent on self-reporting accuracy + May need cultural interpretation

Solution

Envisioning Attenly - A Child Centric, Collaborative ADHD Screening app for parents and teachers

Information Architecture & Wireframes

Information Architecture

Key Features

User Types

Parents

Teachers

Outpatient Clinicians

Account Management

Create and manage accounts for users

Questionnaires

Fixed multiple-choice and free-text questions

Include specific screening tools

Data Management

Export responses to Excel

Admin panel for data viewing

Compliance and Privacy

Encrypt data storage

Include consent forms

Comply with various regulations

Display privacy policies

ADHD Screening App

Design Considerations

Steps for UX Design

UI/UX

User-friendly design

Responsive layouts

Visual elements

Focus on usability

Technologies

React JS for web, React Native for mobile

Node.js for backend API

Feedback and Compliance

Develop MVP and gather feedback

Ensure legal compliance

Research User Personas

User Journey Maps

Wireframes and Prototypes

Usability Testing

Iterate and Refine

Final Design Specs

Low-Fidelity Wireframes

User Flow

Composite User Journey
Post Attenly

→ Scroll to explore

Stage

Early Awareness

Seeking Clarity

Screening & Assessment

Post-Screening

Teacher / Early Signs

Notices patterns without panic; inattention, not fear

Flags repeated behaviors without labeling

Uses Attenly’s classroom checklist

Shares results late; follows structured next step

Parent Awareness

Guided home inputs; feels supported

Stays with observation; reframes concern

Knows next step; structured assessment

Reassurance with clear information; reduced anxiety

Child Experience

Age-appropriate interactions with parents & teachers

Understanding relationship; strength in academic settings

Short, engaging screening; emotional validation

Behavior discussed inclusively; feels supported

Primary Care

Pre-visit screening data available

Confident contribution; professional clarity

Integrated tools; evidence-based next steps

Targeted assessment; timely referral

Counselor / Psychologist

Receives pre-assessment inputs from parents & teachers

Standardized tools; clear protocols

Combined screening; reduced wait times

Clear explanations; continuity of care

Opportunities

Normalize early consultation; shared vocabulary

Light-touch updates; reframe ADHD narrative

Encourages collaborative growth across stakeholders

Protective post-screening layer; ongoing support

Branding

Brand Identity

Color Palette

Deep Forest Green

Warm Orange

Charcoal

Soft Cream

Visual Design

Few Screens at Glimpse
High Fidelity

Interactive

ADHD often goes unidentified in early childhood, despite symptoms appearing between ages 6-12

Research-Driven Design Process

Understanding the brief

Line of inquiry

Literature Review

Stakeholder & Ecosystem Mapping

Contextual Enquiry

Field Visits

Stakeholder Interviews (Semi-Structured)

Surveys

Research Goals

Primary Research Insights

Parents

Teachers

Psychologists

Research Gigamap

Journey Mapping, Personas & Affinity Mapping

Primary & Secondary Research Insights

Iteration 1 — Identifying Themes for each Stakeholder Group

Clustering Themes

Synthesising & Ideation

Crazy 8

Information Architecture & Wireframes

Information Architecture

Low-Fidelity Wireframes

Composite User JourneyPost Attenly

Brand Identity

Color Palette

Few Screens at GlimpseHigh Fidelity

Prototyping

Composite User Journey
Post Attenly

Few Screens at Glimpse
High Fidelity