Ohio State University
The introduction of computer simulation to identify symptoms in children with attention deficit / hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) could provide an additional objective tool for measuring the presence and severity of behavioral problems, Ohio State University researchers suggest in a new publication.
Most mental disorders are diagnosed and treated using clinical interviews and questionnaires. For about a century, data from cognitive tests has been included in the diagnostic process to help doctors learn more about how and why people behave in certain situations.
Cognitive tests in ADHD are used to identify a variety of symptoms and deficits, including selective attention, poor working memory, altered time perception, difficulty maintaining attention, and impulsive behavior. In the most common class of achievement tests, children are advised to either press a computer key or avoid pressing a key when they see a specific word, symbol, or other stimulus.
However, in ADHD, these cognitive tests often fail to capture the complexity of the symptoms. The advent of computational psychiatry – the comparison of a computer-simulated model of normal brain processes with dysfunctional processes seen in tests – could be an important addition to the diagnostic process for ADHD, Ohio state researchers report in a new review published in the journal Psychological Bulletin was published.
The research team reviewed 50 studies of cognitive tests for ADHD and described how three popular types of computational models could complement these tests.
It is generally accepted that children with ADHD take longer to make decisions while performing tasks than children who do not have the disorder. Tests relied on average response times to explain the difference. However, there are complications with this disorder that a computational model can pinpoint by providing information that doctors, parents, and teachers can use to make life easier for children with ADHD.
« We can use models to simulate the decision-making process and see how decisions are made over time – and to better find out why children with ADHD take longer to make decisions, » said Nadja Ging-Jehli , Lead reviewer and a graduate student in psychology at Ohio State.
Ging-Jehli completed the review with Roger Ratcliff, Professor of Psychology, and L. . Eugene Arnold, Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry and Behavioral Health.
The researchers make recommendations for testing and clinical practice to achieve three main goals: better characterizing ADHD and related psychological diagnoses such as anxiety and depression, improving patient outcomes (about a third of patients with ADHD are unresponsive to medical care Treatment) and possibly predicting which children will “lose” the ADHD diagnosis as adults.
The decision-making behind the steering wheel of a car illustrates the problem: Drivers know that they can pass an intersection when a red light turns green – but not everyone steps on the accelerator at the same time. A general cognitive test of this behavior would repeatedly expose drivers to the same red-green-green-light scenario to get an average response time and use this average and deviations from it to categorize the typical versus the disordered driver.
This approach was used to determine that people with ADHD typically “start driving” more slowly than people without ADHD. However, that determination leaves out a number of ways that explain why they are slower – they might be distracted, dreaming, or feeling nervous in a laboratory setting. The wide distribution of responses captured by computer modeling could provide more and useful information.
« In our review we show that this method has several problems that prevent us from understanding the underlying characteristics of a mental disorder such as ADHD and that also prevent us from finding the best treatment for different people » so went-Jehli said. “We can use computer models to think about the factors that create the observed behavior. These factors will broaden our understanding of a disorder and recognize that there are different types of people with different deficits who also require different treatments.
“We suggest using the entire distribution of response times, considering the slowest and fastest response times, to distinguish between different types of ADHD. ”
The review also identified a complicating factor for future ADHD research – a wider range of outwardly obvious symptoms, as well as subtle features that are difficult to detect with most popular testing methods. Understanding that children with ADHD have so many biological differences suggests that a single task-based test isn’t enough to make a meaningful diagnosis of ADHD, the researchers say.
« ADHD is not just the child who wriggles in a chair and is restless. It is also the child who is inattentive because of daydreaming. Although this child is more introverted and does not show as many symptoms as a child with hyperactivity, it does not mean that the child is not suffering, ”said Ging-Jehli. Daydreaming is especially common among girls who don’t participate nearly as often in ADHD studies as boys, she said.
Ging-Jehli described computer psychiatry as an instrument which – continuation of the analogy – also takes into account mechanical differences in the car and how this could influence driver behavior. These dynamics can make ADHD difficult to understand, but it can also open the door to a wider range of treatment options.
“We need to consider the different types of drivers and understand the different conditions we are exposing them to. We cannot draw any conclusions about diagnostic and treatment options based on just one observation, ”she said.
“However, cognitive tests and computer models should not be viewed as an attempt to replace existing clinical interviews and questionnaire-based procedures, but rather as additions that create added value by providing new information. ”
According to the researchers, a set of tasks that measure social and cognitive characteristics should be assigned for a diagnosis, not just one. More consistency is needed across all studies to ensure that the same cognitive tasks are used to assess the appropriate cognitive concepts.
Finally, combining cognitive tests with physiological tests – particularly eye tracking and EEGs that record electrical activity in the brain – could provide meaningful, objective and quantifiable data to help make a diagnosis more reliable and help doctors better predict which drugs are most effective.
Ging-Jehli puts these suggestions to the test in her own research and applies a computational model in a study of a specific neurological intervention in children with ADHD.
« The purpose of our analysis was to show that there is a lack of standardization and complexity and that symptoms are difficult to measure with existing tools, » said Ging-Jehli. “We need to understand ADHD better so that children and adults have a better quality of life and receive the treatment that is most appropriate. ”
This research was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation and the National Institute for Aging Research.
© document. write (new date (). getFullYear ()); | Student Academic Services Building | 281 W. . Lane Ave. . | Columbus, Ohio 43210 |
Contact: Approvals |
Webmaster | Page maintained by
Request an alternative format for this page
Web Services Status |
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, Psychiatry, Research, Mental Health
World News – AU – Pursuit of Better Testing to Clarify the Complexities of ADHD
Related Title :
– A Pursuit of Better Tests Sort the complexity of ADHD
Donnez votre avis et abonnez-vous pour plus d’infos
Vidéo du jour: