Department of Psychology, Aarhus University
Aarhus, (non-US), 8000, Denmark
NCT Number: NCT03917316
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.
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me7 year–11 year
All sexes
Observational
Aarhus, (non-US), 8000, Denmark
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
PARTICIPANTS AND PROCEDURES Up to 100 children with ADHD, age 7-11, consecutively referred from Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark, will be compared to up to 100 typically developing children, age 7-11, recruited from schools in the same community as the hospital.
After initial screening by telephone, informed consent has been obtained from both custodians and verbal assent has been given by the child, all children (ADHD and control) will be assessed at two separate meetings at the University of Aarhus by a member of the project group. The parents will receive questionnaires about their child and if the families give their consent, questionnaires will also be sent to the children's primary teacher. The parents and teachers receive questionnaires about the child's behavior, language and social and academic abilities.
All hypotheses will be investigated with appropriate statistical analyses. The role of IQ, parental educational level etc. is also examined in the analyses. If an adequate sample size is obtained, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) will be applied to handle data, and if a factor solution is supported, factor scores will be included in all analyses, thereby reducing the number of variables in the analyses.
REGISTRATION DETAILS The study record reported at clinical trials.gov is completely consistent with the protocol approved by the Central Region Committee on Health Research Ethics in Denmark. The study was registered at clinical trials.gov after enrollment had begun, but no changes have been made in any procedures, recruitment etc., and as such it was assessed to be feasible to include the few participants that had been enrolled before registration in clinical trials.
Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Tests related to language, narrative and specific and general cognitive function
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.
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.
Time frame: One day
Online story-telling of the wordless picture book "Frog, where are you"
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Time frame: One day
Go/No go (Tsujimoto, 2006), outcome percent false alarms, higher percents indicating problems within inhibition.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Time frame: One day
Reaction time task (Tsujimoto, 2006) measures the child's average reaction time, with higher scores indicating faster reaction time.
Time frame: One day
Ravens Coloured Matrices (Raven, 1998). A task that measures the child's general cognitive ability on a scale of 0-36, where higher scores indicate better cognitive abilities.
University of Aarhus
Other
Language and Narrative Abilities of Children With ADHD and the Association to Executive Function, ADHD Symptoms and Social and Academic Function
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT06626750
ADHD, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity
Miami, Florida, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT04082234
ADHD, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT05796427
ADHD, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity
Chicago, Illinois, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT05119660
ADHD, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity
East Providence, Rhode Island, United States
View Trial Details