Increased Risk of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Among Children With Bilateral Congenital Cataracts
Trial Snapshot
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Status
- Completed
- Sponsor
- Enrollment
- 262
- Locations
- 1
- Primary Endpoint
- Risk of ADHD
Study Overview
Brief Summary
In this study, the investigators conducted a cross-sectional, face-to-face investigation to evaluate the behavioral and psychological disorders and the risk of ADHD among children with bilateral congenital cataracts using the Conners'Parent Rating Scale (CPRS) questionnaire, an assessment tool for screening ADHD that obtains parental reports of childhood behavioral problems in research and clinical settings.15-17 Age-matched children with normal vision and the Chinese urban norm were used as controls.
Study Design
- Study Type
- Observational
- Observational Model
- Other
- Time Perspective
- Cross Sectional
Eligibility Criteria
- Ages
- 3 Years to 8 Years (Child)
- Sex
- All
- Accepts Healthy Volunteers
- Yes
Inclusion Criteria
- •CC children and NV children aged 3-8 years presenting to the Zhognshan Ophthalmic Center between July and December 2016.
Exclusion Criteria
- •Patients complicated with systemic manifestations, such as Lowe syndrome, Marfan syndrome, and Down syndrome, were excluded.
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Risk of ADHD
Time Frame: 2016.7-12
The Conners' Parent Rating Scale 48 (CPRS-48) contains 5 evaluating subscales, including the conduct problems, learning problems, psychosomatic, impulsiveness/hyperactivity, and anxiety subscales. A total of 48 items are included in the questionnaire, and each item is scored from 0 to 3 (0 represents the best, 3 represents the worst). The final scores of the 5 subscales are defined as the mean scores of the corresponding items: conduct problems (2+8+14+19+20+21+22+23+27+33+34+39)/12; learning problems (10+25+31+37)/4; psychosomatic (32+41+43+44+48)/5; impulsiveness/hyperactivity (4+5+11+13)/4; anxiety (12+16+24+47)/4; and the hyperactivity index (4+7+11+13+14+25+31+33+37+38)/10. Final scores and the five subscales of the CPRS-48 between two groups were compared.
Secondary Outcomes
No secondary outcomes reported
Investigators
Haotian Lin
Prof.
Sun Yat-sen University