| Literature DB >> 32370023 |
Alessio Bellato1, Iti Arora1, Puja Kochhar1, Chris Hollis1,2, Madeleine J Groom1.
Abstract
Investigating electrophysiological measures during resting-state might be useful to investigate brain functioning and responsivity in individuals under diagnostic assessment for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and autism. EEG was recorded in 43 children with or without ADHD and autism, during a 4-min-long resting-state session which included an eyes-closed and an eyes-open condition. We calculated and analyzed occipital absolute and relative spectral power in the alpha frequency band (8-12 Hz), and alpha reactivity, conceptualized as the difference in alpha power between eyes-closed and eyes-open conditions. Alpha power was increased during eyes-closed compared to eyes-open resting-state. While absolute alpha power was reduced in children with autism, relative alpha power was reduced in children with ADHD, especially during the eyes-closed condition. Reduced relative alpha reactivity was mainly associated with lower IQ and not with ADHD or autism. Atypical brain functioning during resting-state seems differently associated with ADHD and autism, however further studies replicating these results are needed; we therefore suggest involving research groups worldwide by creating a shared and publicly available repository of resting-state EEG data collected in people with different psychological, psychiatric, or neurodevelopmental conditions, including ADHD and autism.Entities:
Keywords: ADHD; EEG; alpha; alpha reactivity; autism; resting-state
Year: 2020 PMID: 32370023 PMCID: PMC7288160 DOI: 10.3390/brainsci10050272
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Brain Sci ISSN: 2076-3425
Socio-demographic and clinical characteristics of the sample included in the present study.
| Demographic and Clinical Variables Mean [SD] | Typically Developing Controls | ADHD-Only | Autism-Only | ADHD + Autism | Group Comparisons |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N (females) | 20 (3) | 9 (5) | 6 (0) | 8 (0) | - |
| Mean age (years) | 11.93 | 12.09 | 12.56 | 13.12 | None |
| Social Communication Questionnaire (total score) | 3.35 | 13.75 | 20.50 | 26.25 | ADHD + autism > ADHD-only; |
| Conners’ Rating Scales (total score) | 41.12 | 80.78 | 64.17 | 78.75 | ADHD-only, ADHD + autism and autism-only > TD |
| Full Scale IQ | 111.19 | 93.00 | 107.17 | 89.86 | ADHD-only < TD; |
Mean values are reported for each group, with standard deviations in parentheses.
Figure 1Comparison of absolute alpha power during eyes-open and eyes-closed resting-state conditions. Error bars are 95% credible intervals.
Figure 2Comparison of absolute alpha power between children with and without autism. Error bars are 95% credible intervals.
Figure 3Comparison of relative alpha power during eyes-open and eyes-closed resting-state conditions. Error bars are 95% credible intervals.
Figure 4Comparison of relative alpha power during eyes-open and eyes-closed, across children with and without attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Error bars are 95% credible intervals.
Comparison of relative alpha power during eyes-open and eyes-closed resting-state conditions, between children with and without ADHD.
| Condition | Group | Mean Relative Alpha Power | SD | 95 % Credible Interval | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower | Upper | ||||
| Eyes-open | No-ADHD | 0.258 | 0.152 | 0.197 | 0.319 |
| ADHD | 0.162 | 0.080 | 0.121 | 0.203 | |
| Eyes-closed | No-ADHD | 0.442 | 0.187 | 0.367 | 0.518 |
| ADHD | 0.261 | 0.154 | 0.181 | 0.340 | |
Figure 5Correlation plot between full scale IQ (FSIQ) and relative alpha reactivity.
Results of the Bayesian linear regression on relative alpha reactivity, investigating the predictive effect of IQ, ADHD-, and autism-diagnosis.
| Models | Bayes Factor | R² |
|---|---|---|
| a. IQ | 6.773 | 0.215 |
| b. ADHD | 0.601 | 0.105 |
| c. Autism | 0.125 | 0.006 |
| d. ADHD + autism | 0.226 | 0.105 |
| e. IQ + ADHD + autism | 0.626 | 0.222 |
| f. IQ + ADHD | 1.684 | 0.218 |
| g. IQ + autism | 1.676 | 0.218 |
Bayes Factor and R2 are reported for each of the regression models investigated, which included one predictive factor (models a.–c.) or a combination of several predictive factors (models d.–g.).