Suppr超能文献

儿童和青少年注意缺陷多动障碍与无注意缺陷多动障碍患者的时间折扣:四种评分方法的比较。

Temporal discounting in children and adolescents with and without attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a comparison of four scoring methods.

机构信息

Great Lakes Neurobehavioral Center, Edina, MN, USA.

Research in Developmental Disorders Lab, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.

出版信息

Child Neuropsychol. 2024 Jul;30(5):702-721. doi: 10.1080/09297049.2023.2268768. Epub 2023 Oct 20.

Abstract

Temporal discounting (TD) tasks measure the preference for immediate rewards over larger delayed rewards and have been widely used to study impulsivity in children and adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Relatively impulsive individuals tend to show high inconsistency in their choices, which makes it difficult to determine commonly used TD outcome measures (e.g., area under the curve, AUC). In this study, we leveraged two published datasets to compare four methods to compute TD outcome measures in children and adolescents (8-17 years) with ( = 107) and without ADHD ( = 128): two predetermined rules methods, a proportion method, and logistic regression. In both datasets, when using the two predetermined rules methods and the proportion method, TD outcomes were highly correlated and group differences in TD were similar. When using logistic regression, a large proportion of AUCs (95% in dataset 1; 33% in dataset 2) could not be computed due to inconsistent choice patterns. These findings indicate that predetermined rules methods (for studies with small sample sizes and experienced raters) and a proportion method (for studies with larger sample sizes or less experienced raters) are recommended over logistic regression when determining subjective reward values for participants with inconsistent choice patterns.

摘要

时间折扣(TD)任务衡量了人们对即时奖励与更大延迟奖励的偏好,已被广泛用于研究注意力缺陷/多动障碍(ADHD)儿童和青少年的冲动性。相对冲动的个体往往在他们的选择中表现出高度的不一致,这使得确定常用的 TD 结果测量方法(例如,曲线下面积,AUC)变得困难。在这项研究中,我们利用两个已发表的数据集来比较四种方法在儿童和青少年(8-17 岁)中计算 TD 结果测量的方法(ADHD 组=107,无 ADHD 组=128):两种预定规则方法、一种比例方法和逻辑回归。在两个数据集中,当使用两种预定规则方法和比例方法时,TD 结果高度相关,TD 方面的组间差异相似。当使用逻辑回归时,由于选择模式不一致,大量 AUC(数据集 1 中的 95%;数据集 2 中的 33%)无法计算。这些发现表明,当参与者的选择模式不一致时,预定规则方法(适用于样本量较小和经验丰富的评分者的研究)和比例方法(适用于样本量较大或经验较少的评分者的研究)比逻辑回归更推荐用于确定主观奖励值。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验