Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and executive functioning in affected and unaffected adolescents and their parents: challenging the endophenotype construct

2013 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 881-892 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. J. A. M. Thissen ◽  
N. N. J. Rommelse ◽  
P. J. Hoekstra ◽  
C. Hartman ◽  
D. Heslenfeld ◽  
...  

BackgroundThe results of twin and sibling studies suggest that executive functioning is a prime candidate endophenotype in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, studies have not assessed the co-segregation of executive function (EF) deficits from parents to offspring directly, and it is unclear whether executive functioning is an ADHD endophenotype in adolescents, given the substantial changes in prefrontal lobe functioning, EF and ADHD symptoms during adolescence.MethodWe recruited 259 ADHD and 98 control families with an offspring average age of 17.3 years. All participants were assessed for ADHD and EF [inhibition, verbal (VWM) and visuospatial working memory (VsWM)]. Data were analysed using generalized estimating equations (GEEs).ResultsParental ADHD was associated with offspring ADHD and parental EF was associated with offspring EF but there were no cross-associations (parental ADHD was not associated with offspring EF or vice versa). Similar results were found when siblings were compared. EF deficits were only found in affected adolescents and not in their unaffected siblings or (un)affected parents.ConclusionsThe core EFs proposed to be aetiologically related to ADHD, that is working memory and inhibition, seem to be aetiologically independent of ADHD in adolescence. EF deficits documented in childhood in unaffected siblings were no longer present in adolescence, suggesting that children ‘grow out’ of early EF deficits. This is the first study to document ADHD and EF in a large family sample with adolescent offspring. The results suggest that, after childhood, the majority of influences on ADHD are independent from those on EF. This has potential implications for current aetiological models of causality in ADHD.

2015 ◽  
Vol 233 (2) ◽  
pp. 233-242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanneke van Ewijk ◽  
Wouter D. Weeda ◽  
Dirk J. Heslenfeld ◽  
Marjolein Luman ◽  
Catharina A. Hartman ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 38 ◽  
pp. 134-144 ◽  
Author(s):  
Connor H.G. Patros ◽  
R. Matt Alderson ◽  
Sarah E. Lea ◽  
Stephanie J. Tarle ◽  
Lisa J. Kasper ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 53 (9) ◽  
pp. 1020-1030.e6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne-Claude V. Bédard ◽  
Jeffrey H. Newcorn ◽  
Suzanne M. Clerkin ◽  
Beth Krone ◽  
Jin Fan ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashley N. Simone ◽  
Anne-Claude V. Bédard ◽  
David J. Marks ◽  
Jeffrey M. Halperin

AbstractThe aim of this study was to examine working memory (WM) modalities (visual-spatial and auditory-verbal) and processes (maintenance and manipulation) in children with and without attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The sample consisted of 63 8-year-old children with ADHD and an age- and sex-matched non-ADHD comparison group (N=51). Auditory-verbal and visual-spatial WM were assessed using the Digit Span and Spatial Span subtests from the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children Integrated - Fourth Edition. WM maintenance and manipulation were assessed via forward and backward span indices, respectively. Data were analyzed using a 3-way Group (ADHD vs. non-ADHD)×Modality (Auditory-Verbal vs. Visual-Spatial)×Condition (Forward vs. Backward) Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). Secondary analyses examined differences between Combined and Predominantly Inattentive ADHD presentations. Significant Group×Condition (p=.02) and Group×Modality (p=.03) interactions indicated differentially poorer performance by those with ADHD on backward relative to forward and visual-spatial relative to auditory-verbal tasks, respectively. The 3-way interaction was not significant. Analyses targeting ADHD presentations yielded a significant Group×Condition interaction (p=.009) such that children with ADHD-Predominantly Inattentive Presentation performed differentially poorer on backward relative to forward tasks compared to the children with ADHD-Combined Presentation. Findings indicate a specific pattern of WM weaknesses (i.e., WM manipulation and visual-spatial tasks) for children with ADHD. Furthermore, differential patterns of WM performance were found for children with ADHD-Predominantly Inattentive versus Combined Presentations. (JINS, 2016, 22, 1–11)


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document