These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Blinded, multi-center validation of EEG and rating scales in identifying ADHD within a clinical sample.
    Author: Snyder SM, Quintana H, Sexson SB, Knott P, Haque AF, Reynolds DA.
    Journal: Psychiatry Res; 2008 Jun 30; 159(3):346-58. PubMed ID: 18423617.
    Abstract:
    Previous validation studies of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) assessment by rating scales or EEG have provided Class-IV evidence per standards of the American Academy of Neurology. To investigate clinical applications, we collected Class-I evidence, namely from a blinded, prospective, multi-center study of a representative clinical sample categorized with a clinical standard. Participating males (101) and females (58) aged 6 to 18 had presented to one of four psychiatric and pediatric clinics because of the suspected presence of attention and behavior problems. DSM-IV diagnosis was performed by clinicians assisted with a semi-structured clinical interview. EEG (theta/beta ratio) and ratings scales (Conners Rating Scales-Revised and ADHD Rating Scales-IV) were collected separately in a blinded protocol. ADHD prevalence in the clinical sample was 61%, whereas the remainder had other childhood/adolescent disorders or no diagnosis. Comorbidities were observed in 66% of ADHD patients and included mood, anxiety, disruptive, and learning disorders at rates similar to previous findings. EEG identified ADHD with 87% sensitivity and 94% specificity. Rating scales provided sensitivity of 38-79% and specificity of 13-61%. While parent or teacher identification of ADHD by rating scales was reduced in accuracy when applied to a diverse clinical sample, theta/beta ratio changes remained consistent with the clinician's ADHD diagnosis. Because theta/beta ratio changes do not identify comorbidities or alternative diagnoses, the results do not support the use of EEG as a stand-alone diagnostic and should be limited to the interpretation that EEG may complement a clinical evaluation for ADHD.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]