MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1007/s10802-009-9328-y

Медицинская библиотека · Journal of abnormal child psychology · 2009

How distinctive are ADHD and RD? Results of a double dissociation study.

de Jong Christien G W, Van De Voorde Séverine, Roeyers Herbert, Raymaekers Ruth, Oosterlaan Jaap, Sergeant Joseph A

СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

The nature of the comorbidity between Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and Reading Disability (RD) was examined using a double dissociation design. Children were between 8 and 12 years of age and entered into four groups: ADHD only (n = 24), ADHD+RD (n = 29), RD only (n = 41) and normal controls (n = 26). In total, 120 children participated in the study; 38 girls and 82 boys. Both ADHD and RD were associated with impairments in inhibition and lexical decision, although inhibition and lexical decision were more severely impaired in RD than in ADHD. Visuospatial working memory deficits were specific to children with only ADHD. It is concluded that there was overlap on lexical decision and to a lesser extent on inhibition between ADHD and RD. In ADHD, impairments were dependent on IQ, which suggest that the overlap in lexical decision and inhibition is different in origin for ADHD and RD. The ADHD only group was specifically characterized by deficits in visuospatial working memory. Hence, no double dissociation between ADHD and RD was found on executive functioning and lexical decision.

Для цитирования: de Jong Christien G W, Van De Voorde Séverine, Roeyers Herbert, Raymaekers Ruth, Oosterlaan Jaap, Sergeant Joseph A. How distinctive are ADHD and RD? Results of a double dissociation study.. Journal of abnormal child psychology. 2009. DOI: 10.1007/s10802-009-9328-y.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.