Resting EEG in ADHD and its relation to gender, age and cognition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Investigations of resting-state EEG in adults with Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is scarce. Moreover, how it relates to the affected cognitive functions is largely unknown and the potential artifacts of gender and age are rarely controlled for. The aim of the present study was to examine how ADHD, sustained attention (SA) and working memory (WM) relate to resting-state EEG power, while controlling for gender and age. Methods: 88 young adults were recruited (41 ADHD; 47 neurotypical). Resting-state EEG was recorded with eyes closed. SA and WM were assessed using IVA-II and Backwards Digit Span (WAIS-IV). Hierarchical regression analysis was used to evaluate how much variance in EEG power in different frequency bands was accounted for by each variable – gender and age first entered together, followed in sequence by group (ADHD vs neurotypical), SA, and WM performances. Results: Elevated power across frequency bands and electrodes was found in women. Slow oscillations reduced with age. Controlling for gender and age, ADHD diagnosis was not significantly associated with variations in EEG. Beta power was associated with poorer SA and WM. Conclusions: ADHD is not associated with EEG power in young adults. Significance : Caution is advised when using EEG in clinical settings.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".