Inattention
Research Papers
Showing 6 of 9A comparison between classical and new proposed feature selection methods for attention level recognition in disordered children
Lack of attention is a chronic behavior in ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder) and ASD (Autism Spectrum Disorder). Our goal is to develop a reliable method for the detection of inattention with high accuracy and low time consumption to be used in real time neurofeedback. The new applied methods for inattention in children are EMD (Empirical Mode Decomposition) with difference time series (Dt) and MRA (Multi Resolution Analysis). EMD is a method of breaking down a signal into ‘modes’ (IMFs) representing its different frequency components. Furthermore, MRA strikes balance between temporal and frequency resolution through localizing the EEG signal in frequency domain of interest (beta range) by wavelet decomposition or EMD and then retains time domain information using FD. As the results demonstrate, in intermediate and severe level cases of inattention, EMD_Dt technique is the most accurate. In mild level cases of inattention MRA (wavelet + FD) technique performance is better than EMD_Dt. However, the time consumption of the MRA (wavelet + FD) technique is fifteen times larger than EMD_Dt technique. EMD_Dt is the best technique as it requires less processing time which is the most important factor in neurofeedback, furthermore, clinician concerned more with severe and intermediate level of inattention to be treated.
View Full Paper →Characterizing the ASD–ADHD phenotype: measurement structure and invariance in a clinical sample
Background: Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) have considerable overlap, supporting the need for a dimensional framework that examines neurodevelopmental domains which cross traditional diagnostic boundaries. In the following study, we use factor analysis to deconstruct the ASD–ADHD phenotype into its underlying phenotypic domains and test for measurement invariance across adaptive functioning, age, gender and ASD/ADHD clinical diagnoses. Methods: Participants included children and youth (aged 3–20 years) with a clinical diagnosis of ASD (n = 727) or ADHD (n = 770) for a total of 1,497 participants. Parents of these children completed the Social Communication Questionnaire (SCQ), a measure of autism symptoms, and the Strengths and Weaknesses of ADHD and Normal Behaviour (SWAN) questionnaire, a measure of ADHD symptoms. An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed on combined SCQ and SWAN items. This was followed by a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and tests of measurement invariance. Results: EFA revealed a four-factor solution (inattention, hyperactivity/impulsivity, social-communication, and restricted, repetitive, behaviours and interests (RRBI)) and a CFA confirmed good model fit. This solution also showed good model fit across subgroups of interest. Conclusions: Our study shows that a combined ASD–ADHD phenotype is characterized by two latent ASD domains (social communication and RRBIs) and two latent ADHD domains (inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity). We established measurement invariance of the derived measurement model across adaptive functioning, age, gender and ASD/ADHD diagnoses
View Full Paper →A Randomized Trial of Comparing the Efficacy of Two Neurofeedback Protocols for Treatment of Clinical and Cognitive Symptoms of ADHD: Theta Suppression/Beta Enhancement and Theta Suppression/Alpha Enhancement
Introduction. Neurofeedback (NF) is an adjuvant or alternative therapy for children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). This study intended to compare the efficacy of two different NF protocols on clinical and cognitive symptoms of ADHD. Materials and Methods. In this clinical trial, sixty children with ADHD aged 7 to 10 years old were randomly grouped to receive two different NF treatments (theta suppression/beta enhancement protocol and theta suppression/alpha enhancement protocol). Clinical and cognitive assessments were conducted prior to and following the treatment and also after an eight-week follow-up. Results. Both protocols alleviated the symptoms of ADHD in general (p < 0.001), hyperactivity (p < 0.001), inattention (p < 0.001), and omission errors (p < 0.001); however, they did not affect the oppositional and impulsive scales nor commission errors. These effects were maintained after an eight-week intervention-free period. The only significant difference between the two NF protocols was that high-frequency alpha enhancement protocol performed better in suppressing omission errors (p < 0.001). Conclusion. The two NF protocols with theta suppression/beta enhancement and theta suppression/alpha enhancement have considerable and comparable effect on clinical symptoms of ADHD. Alpha enhancement protocol was more effective in suppressing omission errors.
View Full Paper →Differential effects of theta/beta and SMR neurofeedback in ADHD on sleep onset latency
Recent studies suggest a role for sleep and sleep problems in the etiology of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and a recent model about the working mechanism of sensori-motor rhythm (SMR) neurofeedback, proposed that this intervention normalizes sleep and thus improves ADHD symptoms such as inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity. In this study we compared adult ADHD patients (N = 19) to a control group (N = 28) and investigated if differences existed in sleep parameters such as Sleep Onset Latency (SOL), Sleep Duration (DUR) and overall reported sleep problems (PSQI) and if there is an association between sleep-parameters and ADHD symptoms. Secondly, in 37 ADHD patients we investigated the effects of SMR and Theta/Beta (TBR) neurofeedback on ADHD symptoms and sleep parameters and if these sleep parameters may mediate treatment outcome to SMR and TBR neurofeedback. In this study we found a clear continuous relationship between self-reported sleep problems (PSQI) and inattention in adults with- and without-ADHD. TBR neurofeedback resulted in a small reduction of SOL, this change in SOL did not correlate with the change in ADHD symptoms and the reduction in SOL only happened in the last half of treatment, suggesting this is an effect of symptom improvement not specifically related to TBR neurofeedback. SMR neurofeedback specifically reduced the SOL and PSQI score, and the change in SOL and change in PSQI correlated strongly with the change in inattention, and the reduction in SOL was achieved in the first half of treatment, suggesting the reduction in SOL mediated treatment response to SMR neurofeedback. Clinically, TBR and SMR neurofeedback had similar effects on symptom reduction in ADHD (inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity). These results suggest differential effects and different working mechanisms for TBR and SMR neurofeedback in the treatment of ADHD
View Full Paper →EEG neurofeedback treatments in children with ADHD: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Objective: We undertook a meta-analysis of published Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) with semi-active control and sham-NF groups to determine whether Electroencephalogram-neurofeedback (EEG-NF) significantly improves the overall symptoms, inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity dimensions for probably unblinded assessment (parent assessment) and probably blinded assessment (teacher assessment) in children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)., Data sources: A systematic review identified independent studies that were eligible for inclusion in a random effects meta-analysis., Data extraction: Effect sizes for ADHD symptoms were expressed as standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals., Results: Five identified studies met eligibility criteria, 263 patients with ADHD were included, 146 patients were trained with EEG-NF. On parent assessment (probably unblinded assessment), the overall ADHD score (SMD = −0.49 [−0.74, −0.24]), the inattention score (SMD = −0.46 [−0.76, −0.15]) and the hyperactivity/impulsivity score (SMD = −0.34 [−0.59, −0.09]) were significantly improved in patients receiving EEG-NF compared to controls. On teacher assessment (probably blinded assessment), only the inattention score was significantly improved in patients receiving EEG-NF compared to controls (SMD = −0.30 [−0.58, −0.03])., Conclusions: This meta-analysis of EEG-NF in children with ADHD highlights improvement in the inattention dimension of ADHD symptoms. Future investigations should pay greater attention to adequately blinded studies and EEG-NF protocols that carefully control the implementation and embedding of training.
View Full Paper →Efficacy of Neurofeedback Treatment in ADHD: The Effects on Inattention, Impulsivity and Hyperactivity: A Meta-Analysis
Since the first reports of neurofeedback treatment in Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in 1976, many studies have investigated the effects of neurofeedback on different symptoms of ADHD such as inattention, impulsivity and hyperactivity. This technique is also used by many practitioners, but the question as to the evidence-based level of this treatment is still unclear. In this study selected research on neurofeedback treatment for ADHD was collected and a meta-analysis was performed. Both prospective controlled studies and studies employing a pre-and post-design found large effect sizes (ES) for neurofeedback on impulsivity and inattention and a medium ES for hyperactivity. Randomized studies demonstrated a lower ES for hyperactivity suggesting that hyperactivity is probably most sensitive to nonspecific treatment factors. Due to the inclusion of some very recent and sound methodological studies in this meta-analysis, potential confounding factors such as small studies, lack of randomization in previous studies and a lack of adequate control groups have been addressed, and the clinical effects of neurofeedback in the treatment of ADHD can be regarded as clinically meaningful. Three randomized studies have employed a semi-active control group which can be regarded as a credible sham control providing an equal level of cognitive training and client-therapist interaction. Therefore, in line with the AAPB and ISNR guidelines for rating clinical efficacy, we conclude that neurofeedback treatment for ADHD can be considered “Efficacious and Specific” (Level 5) with a large ES for inattention and impulsivity and a medium ES for hyperactivity.
View Full Paper →Ready to Optimize Your Brain?
Schedule a free consultation to discuss inattention and how neurofeedback training can help
Or call us directly at 855-88-BRAIN
View Programs & Pricing →