2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2005.03.012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Event-related potentials in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder of the predominantly inattentive type: An investigation of EEG-defined subtypes

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
23
0
6

Year Published

2009
2009
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 53 publications
4
23
0
6
Order By: Relevance
“…In an oddball study examining the effects of stimulus probability/sequencing in various AD/HD subtypes with and without reading or math disorder, children with AD/HDcom and AD/HDin did not show the expected increase in P3b latency and N2 and P3b amplitude to "novel" sequence variations, with few differences in ERPs between the subgroups in the easy equiprobable "oddball" task (Klorman et al, 2002). Brown et al (2005) examined children with AD/HDin using an oddball task with visual nontarget and auditory target stimuli, and reported reduced N1, P2 and P3 amplitude to both stimulus types, interpreted as a general deficit in stimulus registration, facilitation and processing. AD/HDcom and AD/HDin subtypes were subsequently compared in this multi-modal oddball task, with similar but more extreme differences reported for AD/HDcom, and the reduced P3 amplitude for both groups seen as indicating that a deficit in discrimination and classification of all stimuli is a core feature of AD/HD (Barry et al, 2006).…”
Section: Attentionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…In an oddball study examining the effects of stimulus probability/sequencing in various AD/HD subtypes with and without reading or math disorder, children with AD/HDcom and AD/HDin did not show the expected increase in P3b latency and N2 and P3b amplitude to "novel" sequence variations, with few differences in ERPs between the subgroups in the easy equiprobable "oddball" task (Klorman et al, 2002). Brown et al (2005) examined children with AD/HDin using an oddball task with visual nontarget and auditory target stimuli, and reported reduced N1, P2 and P3 amplitude to both stimulus types, interpreted as a general deficit in stimulus registration, facilitation and processing. AD/HDcom and AD/HDin subtypes were subsequently compared in this multi-modal oddball task, with similar but more extreme differences reported for AD/HDcom, and the reduced P3 amplitude for both groups seen as indicating that a deficit in discrimination and classification of all stimuli is a core feature of AD/HD (Barry et al, 2006).…”
Section: Attentionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…This result was observed more consistently in children with the combined type of AD/HD as compared with the inattentive type, and in childhood than adolescent AD/HD. The inference of unusual P300 source activity in AD/HD has been con-firmed and extended using an inter-modality oddball task (Brown et al, 2005;, a stop-signal task (e.g., Dimoska et al, 2003), a go/no-go task (e.g., Smith et al, 2004), and a CPT (e.g., Banaschewski et al, 2003Banaschewski et al, , 2004.…”
Section: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity Disordermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…En relación con el componente P300 en los subtipos de TDAH se han encontrado algunos resultados interesantes aunque muy variables entre estudios. Mientras que algunos trabajos no encuentran diferencias destacables entre los subtipos , otros apuntan a que los subtipos combinado e inatento mostrarían patrones eléctricos diferenciales, encontrando diferencias inter-grupo más extremas en el subtipo combinado (Brown et al, 2005;Johnstone, 2011;Johnstone, Barry y Clarke, 2012). Más allá del P300, varios trabajos han descrito perfiles eléctricos diferenciales entre los subtipos de TDAH (Aguilar, 2013).…”
Section: Conclusionesunclassified
“…Dividida la muestra con sintomatología TDAH en grupos por subtipo, se explora un posible perfil diferencial en el componente P300. En general se ha documentado que no existen diferencias claras en el componente P300 entre los subtipos predominantes de TDAH (combinado e inatento) (Brown et al, 2005;Keage et al, 2008;Klorman et al, 2002). Sin embargo, persisten algunas dudas al respecto y muchos trabajos siguen encontrando patrones diferenciales al aislar un subtipo específico, de modo que en el subtipo combinado se encontraría una tendencia hacia menor amplitud del componente P300 en tareas asociadas a control inhibitorio, procesamiento de información conflictiva y control de interferencia (Johnstone et al, 2010;van Mourik et al, 2010;.…”
Section: Referidas Al Objetivounclassified
See 1 more Smart Citation