Comparing Theta Beta Ratio in Children With Attention-deficit/hyperactive Disorder and Specific Learning Disorder During Active EEG.

Fatemeh Gholamali Nezhad, Mahdieh Sadat Mirmohammad, Reza Rostami, Hanie Ahmadi
{"title":"Comparing Theta Beta Ratio in Children With Attention-deficit/hyperactive Disorder and Specific Learning Disorder During Active EEG.","authors":"Fatemeh Gholamali Nezhad, Mahdieh Sadat Mirmohammad, Reza Rostami, Hanie Ahmadi","doi":"10.32598/bcn.2021.3359.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Theta-to-beta ratio (TBR) has been claimed as a biomarker to diagnose attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, the effectiveness of this index in identifying different groups of ADHD is still under discussion. Our primary purpose was to determine to what extent active TBR can differentiate between children with ADHD and specific learning disorder (SLD) as the most common comorbid disorder.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two groups of school-aged children with SLD (n=15) and ADHD (n=15) were diagnosed through a process of clinical interview and observation. Electroencephalography (EEG) was recorded in both groups during active conditions. The implemented cognitive task was the visual continuous performance task (VCPT). TBR in sites of CZ and Fz and cognitive measures of VCPT were calculated in the study groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no significant differences in cognitive measures (commission, omission, reaction time, and variability of reaction times) shown in two matched groups of children with SLD and ADHD. According to TBR, the two groups demonstrated no significant differences in comparison.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>TBR cannot be considered a reliable biomarker to differentiate between those groups of psychological disorders that contain primary cognitive deficits and require the allocation of attention and working memory loads.</p>","PeriodicalId":8728,"journal":{"name":"Basic and Clinical Neuroscience Journal","volume":"85 1","pages":"45-54"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12248177/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Basic and Clinical Neuroscience Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32598/bcn.2021.3359.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Theta-to-beta ratio (TBR) has been claimed as a biomarker to diagnose attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, the effectiveness of this index in identifying different groups of ADHD is still under discussion. Our primary purpose was to determine to what extent active TBR can differentiate between children with ADHD and specific learning disorder (SLD) as the most common comorbid disorder.

Methods: Two groups of school-aged children with SLD (n=15) and ADHD (n=15) were diagnosed through a process of clinical interview and observation. Electroencephalography (EEG) was recorded in both groups during active conditions. The implemented cognitive task was the visual continuous performance task (VCPT). TBR in sites of CZ and Fz and cognitive measures of VCPT were calculated in the study groups.

Results: There were no significant differences in cognitive measures (commission, omission, reaction time, and variability of reaction times) shown in two matched groups of children with SLD and ADHD. According to TBR, the two groups demonstrated no significant differences in comparison.

Conclusion: TBR cannot be considered a reliable biomarker to differentiate between those groups of psychological disorders that contain primary cognitive deficits and require the allocation of attention and working memory loads.

注意缺陷/多动障碍与特异性学习障碍儿童活动脑电图中θ β比值的比较
Theta-to-beta ratio (TBR)被认为是诊断注意力缺陷/多动障碍(ADHD)的生物标志物。然而,该指数在识别不同ADHD群体方面的有效性仍在讨论中。我们的主要目的是确定活动性TBR在多大程度上可以区分ADHD儿童和最常见的共病障碍特异性学习障碍(SLD)。方法:通过临床访谈和观察,对两组学龄期SLD患儿(n=15)和ADHD患儿(n=15)进行诊断。记录两组在活动状态下的脑电图(EEG)。执行的认知任务为视觉连续表现任务(VCPT)。计算各研究组CZ、Fz部位TBR及VCPT认知测量值。结果:在两组匹配的SLD和ADHD儿童中,认知测量(缺失、缺失、反应时间和反应时间变异性)没有显着差异。根据TBR,两组比较无显著差异。结论:TBR不能被认为是一种可靠的生物标志物来区分那些包含原发性认知缺陷并需要分配注意力和工作记忆负荷的心理障碍群体。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信