<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><submitter>Garcia Murillo L</submitter><funding>NICHD NIH HHS</funding><funding>NIMH NIH HHS</funding><funding>Alicia Koplowitz Foundation</funding><pagination>14-26</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC4522351</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>252</volume><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Introduction&lt;/h4>Our aim was to assess differences in movement measures in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) vs. typically developing (TD) controls.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>We performed meta-analyses of published studies on motion measures contrasting ADHD with controls. We also conducted a case-control study with children/adolescents (n = 61 TD, n = 62 ADHD) and adults (n = 30 TD, n = 19 ADHD) using the McLean motion activity test, semi-structured diagnostic interviews and the behavior rating inventory of executive function and Conners (parent, teacher; self) rating scales.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Meta-analyses revealed medium-to-large effect sizes for actigraph (standardized mean difference [SMD]: 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.43, 0.85) and motion tracking systems (SDM: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.65, 1.20) measures in differentiating individuals with ADHD from controls. Effects sizes were similar in studies of children/adolescents ([SMD]: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.50, 1.01) and of adults ([SMD]: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.46, 1.00). In our sample, ADHD groups differed significantly in number of head movements (p = 0.02 in children; p = 0.002 in adults), displacement (p = 0.009/p &lt; 0.001), head area (p = 0.03/p &lt; 0.001), spatial complexity (p = 0.06/p = 0.02) and temporal scaling (p = 0.05/p = 0.04). Mean effect sizes were non-significantly larger (d = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.20, 1.45) in adults vs. children/adolescents with ADHD (d = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.08, 0.82). In the concurrent go/no-go task, reaction time variability was significantly greater in ADHD (p &lt; 0.05 in both age groups) than controls.&lt;h4>Conclusions&lt;/h4>Locomotor hyperactivity remains core to the construct of ADHD even in adults. Our results suggest that objective locomotion measures may be particularly useful in evaluating adults with possible ADHD.</pubmed_abstract><journal>Journal of neuroscience methods</journal><pubmed_title>Locomotor activity measures in the diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: Meta-analyses and new findings.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC4522351</pmcid><funding_grant_id>R01MH081218</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>R01 MH083246</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>R01MH083246</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>R01HD065282</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>R01 MH081218</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>R01 HD065282</funding_grant_id><pubmed_authors>Castellanos FX</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Cortese S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Anderson D</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Di Martino A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Garcia Murillo L</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Locomotor activity measures in the diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: Meta-analyses and new findings.</name><description>&lt;h4>Introduction&lt;/h4>Our aim was to assess differences in movement measures in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) vs. typically developing (TD) controls.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>We performed meta-analyses of published studies on motion measures contrasting ADHD with controls. We also conducted a case-control study with children/adolescents (n = 61 TD, n = 62 ADHD) and adults (n = 30 TD, n = 19 ADHD) using the McLean motion activity test, semi-structured diagnostic interviews and the behavior rating inventory of executive function and Conners (parent, teacher; self) rating scales.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Meta-analyses revealed medium-to-large effect sizes for actigraph (standardized mean difference [SMD]: 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.43, 0.85) and motion tracking systems (SDM: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.65, 1.20) measures in differentiating individuals with ADHD from controls. Effects sizes were similar in studies of children/adolescents ([SMD]: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.50, 1.01) and of adults ([SMD]: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.46, 1.00). In our sample, ADHD groups differed significantly in number of head movements (p = 0.02 in children; p = 0.002 in adults), displacement (p = 0.009/p &lt; 0.001), head area (p = 0.03/p &lt; 0.001), spatial complexity (p = 0.06/p = 0.02) and temporal scaling (p = 0.05/p = 0.04). Mean effect sizes were non-significantly larger (d = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.20, 1.45) in adults vs. children/adolescents with ADHD (d = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.08, 0.82). In the concurrent go/no-go task, reaction time variability was significantly greater in ADHD (p &lt; 0.05 in both age groups) than controls.&lt;h4>Conclusions&lt;/h4>Locomotor hyperactivity remains core to the construct of ADHD even in adults. Our results suggest that objective locomotion measures may be particularly useful in evaluating adults with possible ADHD.</description><dates><release>2015-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2015 Aug</publication><modification>2024-11-14T06:25:51.69Z</modification><creation>2019-03-27T01:56:08Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC4522351</accession><cross_references><pubmed>25770940</pubmed><doi>10.1016/j.jneumeth.2015.03.001</doi></cross_references></HashMap>