29 Vascular Burden Mediates the Relationship Between ADHD and Cognition in Older Adults
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objective: Accumulating evidence from case-control and population studies suggests attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) confers a 2- to 5-fold risk of all-cause dementia later in life. Here, we investigate vascular burden as a potential mediator of this relationship, because vascular integrity is well known to be compromised in ADHD (due to chronic obesity, diabetes, and hypertension) and is also a robust risk factor for neurodegeneration (due to reduced cerebral blood flow). We use brain white matter hyperintensities (WMH) as a measure of vascular burden. Participants and Methods: Thirty-nine adults aged 48-81 years with clinical ADHD, and 37 matched controls, completed neuropsychological testing and 1.5 T structural neuroimaging. None had stroke. Cognitive tests were demographically-adjusted to Z scores using regression-based norms generated from the control group, and averaged across tests within domains of short- and long-term verbal memory (forward digit span, California Verbal Learning Test, Logical Memory), visual memory (Visual Recognition, Rey Complex Figure), processing speed (coding, trails A, Stroop word-reading and color-naming), language (Boston Naming Test, semantic fluency), visuoconstruction (clock drawing, Rey Complex Figure copy), and executive function (backward digit span, trails B, phonemic fluency, Stroop inhibition, Wisconsin Card Sorting Test). Total WMH volumes (i.e., combined periventricular and deep) within subcortical, temporal, frontal, parietal, and occipital regions were individually divided by regional volumes to produce a proportion of each region representing WMH, then log-transformed to correct for skew. Age-corrected linear regression quantified total effects of ADHD on cognition; when these were significant, mediation models quantified the direct effects of ADHD on WMH volumes and the direct effect of WMH volumes on cognition. Sobel’s test estimated indirect effects of ADHD on cognition via WMH. Results: Group had a significant total effect on Processing Speed (ß=-1.154, p<.001) and on Executive Functioning (ß=-0.587, p=.004), where ADHD participants had lower composite scores (M=-1.10, SD=1.76 and M=-0.54, SD=1.14 respectively) than controls (M=0.02, SD=0.74; M=0.00, SD=0.49). Only frontal-lobe WMH had direct effects on Processing Speed (ß=-0.315, p=.012) and Executive Functioning (ß=-0.273, p<.001). The direct effect of ADHD on frontal WMH was significant (ß=-0.734, p=.016), and Sobel’s tests supported an indirect effect of ADHD on Executive Functioning (z=2.079, p=.038) but not Processing Speed (z=1.785, p=.074) via WMH. Because the effect of ADHD on WMH was negative (i.e., fewer WMH in ADHD) despite worse cognition than controls, we tested the a posteriori hypothesis that WMH burden may be relatively more deleterious for ADHD than controls. We found considerably stronger negative correlations between total WMH volumes and Processing Speed (r=-.423, p=.009) and Executive Functioning (r=-.528, p<.001) in the ADHD group than in controls (r=-.231, p=.175 and r=-.162, p=.346, respectively), even though total whole-brain proportion of WMH (M=0.15%, SD=0.27; Mann-Whitney l/=430.0, p=.002) and frontal-lobe proportion of WMH volumes (M=0.33%, SD=0.51; Mann-Whitney U=464.0, p=.007) were lower in ADHD than in controls (M=0.29%, SD=0.42 and M=0.66%, SD=0.88, respectively). Conclusions: WMH burden contributes significantly to the relationship between ADHD and cognition, but ADHD remains an independent contributor to worse processing speed and executive functioning in older adults. Vascular burden may have relatively more deleterious effects on cognition in ADHD, potentially due to decades of accumulated allostatic load, whereas healthy controls can accumulate greater amounts of WMH before cognition is impacted.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».