超越DSM亚型:反对儿童多动症功能差异的神经心理学证据。

IF 1.1 4区 心理学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Emilio Díaz-Moreno, Jose Heredia-Jimenez, Manuel Escabias
{"title":"超越DSM亚型:反对儿童多动症功能差异的神经心理学证据。","authors":"Emilio Díaz-Moreno, Jose Heredia-Jimenez, Manuel Escabias","doi":"10.1080/21622965.2025.2556429","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The diagnostic subtypes of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) described in the DSM-5 remain widely used in clinical practice despite increasing evidence of their instability and questionable neurocognitive validity. This study examined whether the inattentive, hyperactive/impulsive, and combined presentations correspond to distinct cognitive profiles in school-aged children with ADHD. A total of 114 children aged 7-12 years with DSM-5 ADHD diagnoses were assessed with a standardized neuropsychological battery targeting executive functions, working memory, verbal fluency, and sustained attention. Subtypes were classified with the parent-report SNAP-IV. Exclusionary comorbidities were ruled out via structured interviews and a DSM-based screening tool. Between-group comparisons employed Kruskal-Wallis tests and Bayesian ANOVAs, and a k-means cluster analysis identified empirical cognitive profiles independent of subtype labels. Results showed no significant differences in 14 of 15 measures (all <i>p</i> > 0.05). Bayesian analyses provided substantial support for similarity (BF<sub>10</sub> < 0.33; <i>η</i><sup>2</sup> ≤ 0.06), with only phonological fluency showing a modest group effect (H = 9.52, <i>p</i> = 0.009; BF<sub>10</sub> = 3.89; <i>η</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.084). Cluster analysis yielded two stable profiles (low vs. average-high performance) unrelated to DSM-5 subtypes. These findings challenge the clinical utility of symptom-based subtyping in ADHD and support dimensional, performance-based classification models to guide assessment and individualized intervention.</p>","PeriodicalId":8047,"journal":{"name":"Applied Neuropsychology: Child","volume":" ","pages":"1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Beyond DSM subtypes: Neuropsychological evidence against functional distinctions in childhood ADHD.\",\"authors\":\"Emilio Díaz-Moreno, Jose Heredia-Jimenez, Manuel Escabias\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/21622965.2025.2556429\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The diagnostic subtypes of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) described in the DSM-5 remain widely used in clinical practice despite increasing evidence of their instability and questionable neurocognitive validity. This study examined whether the inattentive, hyperactive/impulsive, and combined presentations correspond to distinct cognitive profiles in school-aged children with ADHD. A total of 114 children aged 7-12 years with DSM-5 ADHD diagnoses were assessed with a standardized neuropsychological battery targeting executive functions, working memory, verbal fluency, and sustained attention. Subtypes were classified with the parent-report SNAP-IV. Exclusionary comorbidities were ruled out via structured interviews and a DSM-based screening tool. Between-group comparisons employed Kruskal-Wallis tests and Bayesian ANOVAs, and a k-means cluster analysis identified empirical cognitive profiles independent of subtype labels. Results showed no significant differences in 14 of 15 measures (all <i>p</i> > 0.05). Bayesian analyses provided substantial support for similarity (BF<sub>10</sub> < 0.33; <i>η</i><sup>2</sup> ≤ 0.06), with only phonological fluency showing a modest group effect (H = 9.52, <i>p</i> = 0.009; BF<sub>10</sub> = 3.89; <i>η</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.084). Cluster analysis yielded two stable profiles (low vs. average-high performance) unrelated to DSM-5 subtypes. These findings challenge the clinical utility of symptom-based subtyping in ADHD and support dimensional, performance-based classification models to guide assessment and individualized intervention.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8047,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Neuropsychology: Child\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Neuropsychology: Child\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/21622965.2025.2556429\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Neuropsychology: Child","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21622965.2025.2556429","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

DSM-5中描述的注意力缺陷/多动障碍(ADHD)的诊断亚型仍然广泛应用于临床实践,尽管越来越多的证据表明它们的不稳定性和可疑的神经认知有效性。这项研究考察了注意力不集中、多动/冲动和综合表现是否与学龄ADHD儿童的不同认知特征相对应。114名年龄在7-12岁、诊断为DSM-5 ADHD的儿童,采用标准化的神经心理学测试对执行功能、工作记忆、语言流畅性和持续注意力进行评估。根据家长报告SNAP-IV进行亚型分类。通过结构化访谈和基于dsm的筛查工具排除排除性合并症。组间比较采用Kruskal-Wallis检验和贝叶斯方差分析,k均值聚类分析确定了独立于亚型标签的经验认知概况。结果显示,15项指标中有14项无显著差异(p < 0.05)。贝叶斯分析为相似性提供了大量支持(BF10 < 0.33; η2≤0.06),只有语音流利性显示适度的群体效应(H = 9.52, p = 0.009; BF10 = 3.89; η2 = 0.084)。聚类分析产生了与DSM-5亚型无关的两个稳定的概要(低与平均高性能)。这些发现挑战了ADHD中基于症状的亚型的临床应用,并支持维度、基于表现的分类模型来指导评估和个性化干预。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Beyond DSM subtypes: Neuropsychological evidence against functional distinctions in childhood ADHD.

The diagnostic subtypes of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) described in the DSM-5 remain widely used in clinical practice despite increasing evidence of their instability and questionable neurocognitive validity. This study examined whether the inattentive, hyperactive/impulsive, and combined presentations correspond to distinct cognitive profiles in school-aged children with ADHD. A total of 114 children aged 7-12 years with DSM-5 ADHD diagnoses were assessed with a standardized neuropsychological battery targeting executive functions, working memory, verbal fluency, and sustained attention. Subtypes were classified with the parent-report SNAP-IV. Exclusionary comorbidities were ruled out via structured interviews and a DSM-based screening tool. Between-group comparisons employed Kruskal-Wallis tests and Bayesian ANOVAs, and a k-means cluster analysis identified empirical cognitive profiles independent of subtype labels. Results showed no significant differences in 14 of 15 measures (all p > 0.05). Bayesian analyses provided substantial support for similarity (BF10 < 0.33; η2 ≤ 0.06), with only phonological fluency showing a modest group effect (H = 9.52, p = 0.009; BF10 = 3.89; η2 = 0.084). Cluster analysis yielded two stable profiles (low vs. average-high performance) unrelated to DSM-5 subtypes. These findings challenge the clinical utility of symptom-based subtyping in ADHD and support dimensional, performance-based classification models to guide assessment and individualized intervention.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Applied Neuropsychology: Child
Applied Neuropsychology: Child CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-PSYCHOLOGY
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
5.90%
发文量
47
期刊介绍: Applied Neuropsychology: Child publishes clinical neuropsychological articles concerning assessment, brain functioning and neuroimaging, neuropsychological treatment, and rehabilitation in children. Full-length articles and brief communications are included. Case studies of child patients carefully assessing the nature, course, or treatment of clinical neuropsychological dysfunctions in the context of scientific literature, are suitable. Review manuscripts addressing critical issues are encouraged. Preference is given to papers of clinical relevance to others in the field. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief, and, if found suitable for further considerations are peer reviewed by independent, anonymous expert referees. All peer review is single-blind and submission is online via ScholarOne Manuscripts.
×
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