Accessibility navigation


Differences in measurements of hyperactivity between objective testing using infrared motion analysis (QbTest) and behavioural rating scales when comparing problems in alerting functions and response inhibition during the clinical assessment of ADHD

Vogt, C., Williams, T., Susi, K. and Harrison, S. (2018) Differences in measurements of hyperactivity between objective testing using infrared motion analysis (QbTest) and behavioural rating scales when comparing problems in alerting functions and response inhibition during the clinical assessment of ADHD. Psychological disorders and research, 1 (2). pp. 3-6.

[img]
Preview
Text (Open access) - Published Version
· Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
· Please see our End User Agreement before downloading.

213kB

It is advisable to refer to the publisher's version if you intend to cite from this work. See Guidance on citing.

To link to this item DOI: 10.31487/j.PDR.2018.02.002

Abstract/Summary

Introduction: Little is known how problems in alerting functions or response inhibition affect objective infrared activity measurements during a continuous performance test (QbTest) despite an increasing use of these tests for the clinical assessment of ADHD. Difficulties in alerting functions and response inhibition are both associated with the presence of behavioural features in all three core domains of ADHD, i.e. inattention, impulsivity and hyperactivity. We hypothesized that objective infrared activity measurements during CPT and behavioural ratings for hyperactivity from a commonly used questionnaire for ADHD (Conners rating scale) would be raised for both alerting functions and response inhibition. Method: 951 sequential referrals completed a QbTest and parent and teacher Conners rating scales followed by a clinical assessment with a CAMHS clinician. Two groups, one with exclusive difficulties in alerting functions (inattention) and the other with exclusive difficulties in response inhibition (impulsive) resulting from the QbTest performance were extracted from the pool and activity measurements, rating scales and diagnostic outcome were compared. Results: Contrary to our hypothesis, only the group with difficulties in alerting functions (inattentive) showed significantly raised activity measurements during CPT. However, both groups had raised scores for hyperactivity in the behavioural rating scales. A higher number of cases with difficulties in alerting functions (79.6%) were assigned a diagnosis of ADHD compared to the group with exclusively difficulties in response inhibition (61.8%). Discussion: A cautious evaluation of activity measurements during the QbTest with full consideration of the interplay between naturalistic and laboratory environmental effects on motor activity is recommended

Item Type:Article
Refereed:Yes
Divisions:Faculty of Life Sciences > School of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences > Department of Psychology
Faculty of Arts, Humanities and Social Science > Institute of Education > Improving Equity and Inclusion through Education
Faculty of Life Sciences > School of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences > Psychopathology and Affective Neuroscience
ID Code:79386
Uncontrolled Keywords:ADHD Diagnosis Continuous Performance Test (CPT) Conners Rating Scales Qb test
Publisher:Science Repository
Publisher Statement:All the work at Science Repository is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Authors at Science Repository retain copyright to their work and allow others to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt their work, provided proper attribution is given. This license lets others distribute, remix, tweak, and build upon your work, even commercially, as long as they credit you for the original creation.

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record

Page navigation