Color vision in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A pilot visual evoked potential study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Individuals with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) are reported to manifest visual problems (including ophthalmological and color perception problems, particularly for blue-yellow stimuli), but findings are inconsistent. Accordingly, this study investigated visual function and color perception in adolescents with ADHD using VEP. Method: Participants were 31 adolescents (aged 13-18); 16 with a confirmed diagnosis of ADHD, and 15 healthy peers, matched for age, gender, and IQ. All underwent ophthalmological exam, color vision testing (Mollon-Reffin Minimalist Colour Vision Test), as well as electrophysiological testing (color Visual Evoked Potentials; cVEP) which measured the latency and amplitude of the neural P1 response to chromatic stimuli (Blue-Yellow, Red-Green). Result: No group differences were found in clinical measure of color perception or opthalmological exam. However, significantly larger P1 amplitude was found for blue and yellow stimuli, but not red/green stimuli, in the ADHD group compared to controls. Discussion: Larger amplitude in the P1 component for blue-yellow in ADHD group compared to control group may account for no difference in colour perception task. Perhaps activating more resources in early sensory processing (P1) compensated for any underlying problems including compromised retinal input of s-cones due to hypo-dopaminergic tone.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".