Functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy of English-Speaking Adults With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder During a Verbal Fluency Task
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective:Functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) provides direct and quantitative assessment of cortical hemodynamic response. It has been used to identify neurophysiological alterations in medication-naïve adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Hence, this study aimed to distinguish both medication-naïve and medicated adults with ADHD from healthy controls (HC).Method:75 HCs, 75 medication-naïve, and 45 medicated patients took part in this study. fNIRS signals during a verbal fluency task (VFT) were acquired using a 52-channel system and relative oxy-hemoglobin changes in the prefrontal cortex were quantified.Results:Prefrontal cortex hemodynamic response was lower in patients than HCs (p ≤ ≤.001). Medication-naïve and medicated patients did not differ in hemodynamic response or symptom severity (p > .05). fNIRS measurements were not associated with any clinical variables (p > .05). 75.8% patients and 76% HCs were correctly classified using hemodynamic response.Conclusion:fNIRS may be a potential diagnostic tool for adult ADHD. These findings need to be replicated in larger validation studies.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".