评估成人多动症的抑制控制缺陷:停止信号任务的系统回顾和元分析》。

IF 5.4 2区 心理学 Q1 NEUROSCIENCES Neuropsychology Review Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2023-06-10 DOI:10.1007/s11065-023-09592-5
Daniel Senkowski, Theresa Ziegler, Mervyn Singh, Andreas Heinz, Jason He, Tim Silk, Robert C Lorenz
{"title":"评估成人多动症的抑制控制缺陷:停止信号任务的系统回顾和元分析》。","authors":"Daniel Senkowski, Theresa Ziegler, Mervyn Singh, Andreas Heinz, Jason He, Tim Silk, Robert C Lorenz","doi":"10.1007/s11065-023-09592-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In recent years, there has been an increasing quest in improving our understanding of the neurocognitive deficits underlying adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Current statistical manuals of psychiatric disorders emphasize inattention and hyperactivity-impulsivity symptoms, but empirical studies have also shown consistent alterations in inhibitory control. To date, there is no established neuropsychological test to assess inhibitory control deficits in adult ADHD. A common paradigm for assessing response inhibition is the stop-signal task (SST). Following PRISMA-selection criteria, our systematic review and meta-analysis integrated the findings of 26 publications with 27 studies examining the SST in adult ADHD. The meta-analysis, which included 883 patients with adult ADHD and 916 control participants, revealed reliable inhibitory control deficits, as expressed in prolonged SST response times, with a moderate effect size <math><mi>g</mi></math> = 0.51 (95% CI: 0.376-0.644, <math><mi>p</mi></math> < 0.0001). The deficits were not moderated by study quality, sample characteristics or clinical parameters, suggesting that they may be a phenotype in this disorder. The analyses of secondary outcome measures revealed greater SST omission errors and reduced go accuracy in patients, indicative of altered sustained attention. However, only few (N < 10) studies were available for these measures. Our meta-analysis suggests that the SST, in conjunction with other tests and questionnaires, could become a valuable tool for assessing inhibitory control deficits in adult ADHD.</p>","PeriodicalId":49754,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11166755/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing Inhibitory Control Deficits in Adult ADHD: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Stop-signal Task.\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Senkowski, Theresa Ziegler, Mervyn Singh, Andreas Heinz, Jason He, Tim Silk, Robert C Lorenz\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11065-023-09592-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In recent years, there has been an increasing quest in improving our understanding of the neurocognitive deficits underlying adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Current statistical manuals of psychiatric disorders emphasize inattention and hyperactivity-impulsivity symptoms, but empirical studies have also shown consistent alterations in inhibitory control. To date, there is no established neuropsychological test to assess inhibitory control deficits in adult ADHD. A common paradigm for assessing response inhibition is the stop-signal task (SST). Following PRISMA-selection criteria, our systematic review and meta-analysis integrated the findings of 26 publications with 27 studies examining the SST in adult ADHD. The meta-analysis, which included 883 patients with adult ADHD and 916 control participants, revealed reliable inhibitory control deficits, as expressed in prolonged SST response times, with a moderate effect size <math><mi>g</mi></math> = 0.51 (95% CI: 0.376-0.644, <math><mi>p</mi></math> < 0.0001). The deficits were not moderated by study quality, sample characteristics or clinical parameters, suggesting that they may be a phenotype in this disorder. The analyses of secondary outcome measures revealed greater SST omission errors and reduced go accuracy in patients, indicative of altered sustained attention. However, only few (N < 10) studies were available for these measures. Our meta-analysis suggests that the SST, in conjunction with other tests and questionnaires, could become a valuable tool for assessing inhibitory control deficits in adult ADHD.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49754,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neuropsychology Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11166755/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neuropsychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-023-09592-5\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/6/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuropsychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-023-09592-5","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

近年来,我们对成人注意力缺陷/多动障碍(ADHD)潜在的神经认知缺陷的了解日益加深。目前的精神障碍统计手册强调注意力不集中和多动冲动症状,但实证研究也显示抑制控制方面存在一致的改变。迄今为止,还没有成熟的神经心理学测试来评估成人多动症的抑制控制缺陷。评估反应抑制的常用范式是停止信号任务(SST)。根据 PRISMA 选择标准,我们的系统综述和荟萃分析综合了 26 篇出版物的研究结果,其中有 27 项研究对成人多动症进行了 SST 检测。荟萃分析包括 883 名成人多动症患者和 916 名对照组参与者,结果显示,抑制控制能力存在可靠的缺陷,表现为 SST 反应时间延长,效应大小 g = 0.51(95% CI:0.376-0.644,p < 0.0001)。这种缺陷不受研究质量、样本特征或临床参数的影响,这表明它们可能是这种障碍的一种表型。对次要结果测量的分析表明,患者的 SST 遗漏错误增加,围棋准确性降低,这表明患者的持续注意力发生了改变。然而,只有少数患者(N
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Assessing Inhibitory Control Deficits in Adult ADHD: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Stop-signal Task.

In recent years, there has been an increasing quest in improving our understanding of the neurocognitive deficits underlying adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Current statistical manuals of psychiatric disorders emphasize inattention and hyperactivity-impulsivity symptoms, but empirical studies have also shown consistent alterations in inhibitory control. To date, there is no established neuropsychological test to assess inhibitory control deficits in adult ADHD. A common paradigm for assessing response inhibition is the stop-signal task (SST). Following PRISMA-selection criteria, our systematic review and meta-analysis integrated the findings of 26 publications with 27 studies examining the SST in adult ADHD. The meta-analysis, which included 883 patients with adult ADHD and 916 control participants, revealed reliable inhibitory control deficits, as expressed in prolonged SST response times, with a moderate effect size g = 0.51 (95% CI: 0.376-0.644, p < 0.0001). The deficits were not moderated by study quality, sample characteristics or clinical parameters, suggesting that they may be a phenotype in this disorder. The analyses of secondary outcome measures revealed greater SST omission errors and reduced go accuracy in patients, indicative of altered sustained attention. However, only few (N < 10) studies were available for these measures. Our meta-analysis suggests that the SST, in conjunction with other tests and questionnaires, could become a valuable tool for assessing inhibitory control deficits in adult ADHD.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Neuropsychology Review
Neuropsychology Review 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
1.70%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: Neuropsychology Review is a quarterly, refereed publication devoted to integrative review papers on substantive content areas in neuropsychology, with particular focus on populations with endogenous or acquired conditions affecting brain and function and on translational research providing a mechanistic understanding of clinical problems. Publication of new data is not the purview of the journal. Articles are written by international specialists in the field, discussing such complex issues as distinctive functional features of central nervous system disease and injury; challenges in early diagnosis; the impact of genes and environment on function; risk factors for functional impairment; treatment efficacy of neuropsychological rehabilitation; the role of neuroimaging, neuroelectrophysiology, and other neurometric modalities in explicating function; clinical trial design; neuropsychological function and its substrates characteristic of normal development and aging; and neuropsychological dysfunction and its substrates in neurological, psychiatric, and medical conditions. The journal''s broad perspective is supported by an outstanding, multidisciplinary editorial review board guided by the aim to provide students and professionals, clinicians and researchers with scholarly articles that critically and objectively summarize and synthesize the strengths and weaknesses in the literature and propose novel hypotheses, methods of analysis, and links to other fields.
期刊最新文献
Verbal and Spatial Working Memory Capacity in Blind Adults and the Possible Influence of Age at Blindness Onset: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Reliability of Theory of Mind Tasks in Schizophrenia, ASD, and Nonclinical Populations: A Systematic Review and Reliability Generalization Meta-analysis. Not All Stroop-Type Tasks Are Alike: Assessing the Impact of Stimulus Material, Task Design, and Cognitive Demand via Meta-analyses Across Neuroimaging Studies Cognitive Training During Midlife: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Gradient Organization of Space, Time, and Numbers in the Brain: A Meta-analysis of Neuroimaging Studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1