4.6 Article

EEG coherence and symptom profiles of children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

期刊

CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY
卷 122, 期 7, 页码 1327-1332

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2011.01.007

关键词

Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder; AD/HD; EEG; Gamma; Coherence; Symptoms

资金

  1. Pfizer Australia Pty. Ltd.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: We compared EEG coherence in children with and without AD/HD, and sought to relate observed anomalies to AD/HD symptoms. Methods: Forty children with AD/HD and 40 age-and sex-matched controls had eyes-closed resting EEG coherence calculated for eight interhemispheric electrode pairs and eight intrahemispheric pairs (four within each hemisphere) in the delta, theta, alpha, beta and 40 Hz gamma bands. Results: At short-medium inter-electrode distances, the AD/HD group had increased intrahemispheric coherence in delta and theta, and reduced (L > R) laterality in delta, alpha, beta and gamma. Over longer inter-electrode distances, the AD/HD group had reduced intrahemispheric coherence in alpha. In interhemispheric comparisons, the AD/HD group had reduced frontal coherence in delta, alpha and gamma, increased temporal theta and reduced temporal alpha coherences, and increased central/parietal/occipital coherence in theta. Smaller left-lateralized coherences in AD/HD correlated negatively with DSM Inattentive and DSM Total scores, and smaller frontal interhemispheric coherence in alpha correlated negatively with DSM Hyperactive/Impulsive score. Conclusions: The negative correlations between AD/HD coherence anomalies and symptoms suggest that several anomalies reflect compensatory brain function. Significance: Coherence differences in AD/HD may reflect anomalous frontal right-hemisphere linkages that help compensate functional brain anomalies in the left frontal regions in this disorder. (C) 2011 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据