摘要
目的:通过整合视听连续执行测试(IVA-CPT)和脑电神经电生理检测,探讨两种辅助诊断方法在ADHD诊断中的差异,为临床上选择ADHD辅助诊断方法提供参考。方法:对113名儿童进行整合视听连续执行测试和脑电神经电生理检测,以为参照标准,计算出各自的灵敏度、特异度、误诊率、漏诊率。结果:IVA-CPT诊断ADHD的灵敏度为92.54%,特异度为76.09%,误诊率为23.91%,漏诊率为7.46%。脑电神经电生理检测诊断ADHD的灵敏度为83.58%,特异度为82.61%,误诊率为17.39%,漏诊率为16.42%。结论:相对而言,IVA-CPT的灵敏度和误诊率较高,特异度和漏诊率较低,脑电神经电生理检测的特异度和漏诊率较高,灵敏度和误诊率较低。
Objective: To assess the diagnosis value of applying integrated visual and auditory continuous performance task(IVA-CPT) and EEG biofeedback on children with attention-deficit- hyperactivity disorder(ADHD), and provide information for assisting diagnosis of ADHD. Methods: 113 children with ADHD were tested with IVA-CPT and EEG biofeedback. The sensitivity, specificity, misdiagnosis rate and missed diagnosis rate of these two methods were assessed according to the criteria of DSM-Ⅳ. Results: The sensitivity of IVA-CPT for the diagnosis of children with ADHD was 92.54, the specificity was 76.09%, misdiagnosis rate was 23.911% and missed diagnosis rate was 7.46%. And the sensitivity of EEG biofeedback for the diagnosis of children with ADHD was 83.58%, the specificity was 82.61%, misdiagnosis rate was 17.38 and missed diagnosis rate was 16.42%. Conclusion: Relatively, for diagnosis of children with ADHD, sensitivity is higher and missed diagnosis rate is lower, specificity of EEG biofeedback is higher and misdiagnosis rate is lower .
出处
《中国临床心理学杂志》
CSCD
2005年第1期94-95,90,共3页
Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology
