Language and Narrative Abilities of Children With ADHD and the Association to Executive Function, ADHD Symptoms and Social and Academic Function
Trial Snapshot
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Status
- Completed
- Sponsor
- University of Aarhus
- Enrollment
- 97
- Locations
- 1
- Primary Endpoint
- Working memory 2back task
Study Overview
Brief Summary
BACKGROUND: Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity-Disorder (ADHD) is associated with language difficulties within expressive, receptive and pragmatic areas of language.Telling stories is a particularly interesting language task as is provides the possibility of investigating how children use their language in everyday interactions. Thus, investigating how children with ADHD tell stories provides a more naturalistic impression of their language abilities. However, the extent, causes, and clinical relevance of language and narrative difficulties in ADHD remain largely unknown. Language may be the key to understanding and improving the functional impairments associated with ADHD such as social and academic function.
AIM: The overall aim of the current study was to investigate the association between language, narrative ability and ADHD, what contributes to this association, as well as the clinical relevance of language difficulties in ADHD in relation to academic and social function.
METHOD: Children between 7-11 years old with ADHD will be recruited from Aarhus University Hospital in Skejby and compared to children without ADHD recruited from schools in the community. All children will be assessed at two separate meetings at the Department of Psychology, Aarhus University. The total number of participants in each group will depend on the intake of patients at Aarhus University Hospital, but a maximum of 100 children will be sampled in each group.
Detailed Description
BACKGROUND:
Up to 40% of children with the ADHD are suggested to have language difficulties. Other than language difficulties being debilitating in their own right, language difficulties in childhood ADHD are problematic because they likely enhance the social and academic difficulties often present in children with this disorder. Children with ADHD also appear to have narrative difficulties; i.e. they have problems telling a coherent, understandable story. Telling stories is a particularly interesting language task as the investigation of how children use their language in an unstructured task is similar to how they use their language in everyday interactions.
However, the extent, causes, and clinical relevance of language and narrative difficulties in ADHD remain largely unknown. Studies are scarce and fraught with problems warranting investigations of language abilities in children with ADHD that measure language as well as executive function (EF) and that investigate the clinical relevance of these language difficulties. This is necessary in order to tease apart and gain knowledge of the association between language, EF and ADHD. Ultimately, such an investigation can inspire future assessment and treatment of language difficulties in children with ADHD.
AIMS AND HYPOTHESES
- The first aim is to examine narrative abilities in children with ADHD. This is done by investigating whether children with and without ADHD differ with respect to their narratives.
- The second aim is to examine whether language, EF and/or ADHD symptoms can explain narrative function in children with and without ADHD.
- The third aim is to investigate which specific domains of language children with ADHD have the most difficulty within.
- The fourth aim is to investigate whether the language difficulties as well as the narrative difficulties identified are associated with academic and social function in ADHD.
Study Design
- Study Type
- Observational
- Observational Model
- Case Control
- Time Perspective
- Cross Sectional
Eligibility Criteria
- Ages
- 7 Years to 11 Years (Child)
- Sex
- All
- Accepts Healthy Volunteers
- Yes
Inclusion Criteria
- Not provided
Exclusion Criteria
- Not provided
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Working memory 2back task
Time Frame: One day
A self-designed 2back task modelled from Friedman et al., 2008). Measures the child's working memory. Outcome is mean accuracy, range 0-1, with higher scores indicating better working memory.
Working memory Tic Tac Toe task
Time Frame: One day
Tic Tac Toe (Huizinga et al., 2006). Measures the child's working memory. Outcome is mean accuracy, range 0-1, with higher scores indicating better working memory.
Inhibition Stop-signal task
Time Frame: One day
Stop-Signal task (Logan 1994; Logan, Schachar \& Tannock, 1997; Williams, Pronesse, Schachar; Logan \& Tannock, 1999); outcome Stop-signal Reaction time (SSRT), with slower reaction times indicating problems with inhibtion.
Inhibition Go/No Go task
Time Frame: One day
Go/No go (Tsujimoto, 2006), outcome percent false alarms, higher percents indicating problems within inhibition.
Academic abilities
Time Frame: One day
5-15 questionnaire (Kadesjö, Janols, Korkman, Mickelsson, Strand, Trillingsgaard \& Gillberg, 2005). Questions from the learning domain. The parent rates the child on a scale of 1-3 on 29 questions about academic ability, with higher scores indicating academic difficulties.
Executive functions
Time Frame: One day
Childhood Executive Functioning inventory (CHEXI; Nyberg \& Thorell, 2008). Questionnaire. The parent rates the child on a scale of 1-5 on 26 questions concerning the childs executive functioning. Higher scores indicate problems within executive functioning.
General language ability
Time Frame: One day
Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-4 (Semel, Wiig \& Secord, 2003), measures general language ability. Rawscores on the task are converted to scale scores with a range of 1-14. A scale score of 7-10 is average, above indicates better language proficiency.
Pragmatic language ability
Time Frame: One day
Children's Communication Checklist-2 (CCC-2; Bishop, 2002), index for pragmatic ability, scaled scores (0-14), where 7-10 is average and above indicates better pragmatic language ability.
Narrative abilities
Time Frame: One day
Online story-telling of the wordless picture book "Frog, where are you"
Social abilities
Time Frame: One day
Social Competence Inventory-2 (Rydell Hagekull \& Bohlin, 1997) a questionnaire about social competencies. The parents rate their child on a scale of 1-5 on 25 questions, higher scores indicate better social ability.
Working memory Mental Counters task
Time Frame: One day
Mental Counters (Huizinga et al., 2006). Measures the child's working memory. Outcome is mean accuracy, range 0-1, with higher scores indicating better working memory.
Academic abilities teacher
Time Frame: One day
Teacher Telephone Interview (TTI, Tannock, Manassis \& Fung, 2003, revised and translated with permission from R. Tannock). The teacher rates the child on a scale of 1-5 on 9 school subjects. Higher scores indicate better academic ability.
Inhibition Flanker task
Time Frame: One day
Flanker task (Huyser et al., 2011), outcome median reaction time on conflict trials, with higher median reaction times indicating problems within inhibition.
Secondary Outcomes
- General cognitive abilities(One day)
- Reaction time(One day)