On a more objective test for ADD/ADHD using brain imaging

In summary, there have been several studies on the difference in neural anatomy among ADHD/ADD patients, suggesting the potential use of brain scans as an objective test for diagnosis. However, there are concerns about the reliability and cost of implementing this test, as well as the possibility of faking results. It is important for any test to be rigorously designed and correlated with clinical findings in order to be considered a reliable tool for ADHD/ADD diagnosis.
  • #1
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #2
The subjects in these studies must have been diagnosed with the current methods. For these studies to mean anything that method of diagnosis must have been assumed to be reliable. Diagnosis by brain scan can only affirm the assumptions that have already been made without the brain scans.

Are you thinking a brain scan would settle the issue in a case where someone questions a specific diagnosis of ADD/ADHD? It might cast doubt, I'm sure. If it's taken as definitive, though, it would mostly increase red tape: government assistance agencies and insurance companies would start demanding the "objective" brain scan for proof of the condition.
 
  • #3
zoobyshoe said:
The subjects in these studies must have been diagnosed with the current methods. For these studies to mean anything that method of diagnosis must have been assumed to be reliable. Diagnosis by brain scan can only affirm the assumptions that have already been made without the brain scans.

Are you thinking a brain scan would settle the issue in a case where someone questions a specific diagnosis of ADD/ADHD? It might cast doubt, I'm sure. If it's taken as definitive, though, it would mostly increase red tape: government assistance agencies and insurance companies would start demanding the "objective" brain scan for proof of the condition.

I'm thinking if we can use it to diagnose ADD/ADHD in patients instead of the questionares that are used (not always).

For the underlined part - Which would also be too expensive for the insurance companies, hmm.
 
  • #4
Nano-Passion said:
I'm thinking if we can use it to diagnose ADD/ADHD in patients instead of the questionares that are used (not always).

For the underlined part - Which would also be too expensive for the insurance companies, hmm.

There are statistical tests that can compare patients with and without positive findings on standard testing and with or without positive neuro-anatomical findings. It's essentially a 2x2 contingency table. Whatever has been the standard instrument for diagnosing or not diagnosing ADD/ADHD in the case and control populations should be used.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
SW VandeCarr said:
There are statistical tests that can compare patients with and without positive findings on standard testing and with or without positive neuro-anatomical findings. It's essentially a 2x2 contingency table.

I just had my ADD screening test today, it was just a questionnaire essentially. Why do they still use that method? It strikes me a bit odd because it seems anyone can fake it (not that I was). Why don't more places use a more objective test like the one that you have mentioned.
 
  • #6
Nano-Passion said:
I just had my ADD screening test today, it was just a questionnaire essentially. Why do they still use that method? It strikes me a bit odd because it seems anyone can fake it (not that I was). Why don't more places use a more objective test like the one that you have mentioned.

Whatever test you may choose can be compared to the neuroanatomical findings this way, That's all I can say about this. You could have test that correlates with the neuroanatomical finding but doesn't correlate with the current clinical picture of what ADD/ADHD is. I'm not a psychiatrist so I can't really speculate on that. All I can say is if you think you have a reliable test and believe that there is a correlation with a neuroanatomical finding you can test that hypothesis in a rigorous way assuming your classification scheme is well defined.
 
Last edited:
  • #7
SW VandeCarr said:
Whatever test you may choose can be compared to the neuroanatomical findings this way, That's all I can say about this. You could have test that correlates with the neuroanatomical finding but doesn't correlate with the current clinical picture of what ADD/ADHD is. I'm not a psychiatrist so I can't really speculate on that. All I can say is if you think you have a reliable test and believe that there is a correlation with a neuroanatomical finding you can test that hypothesis in a rigorous way assuming your classification scheme is well defined.

I think it is a reliable test, no doubt about that actually. However what I am worried about is that crafty students can fake the test to take the prescription.
 
  • #8
Nano-Passion said:
I think it is a reliable test, no doubt about that actually. However what I am worried about is that crafty students can fake the test to take the prescription.

All I can say is, if that's the case, you don't have a reliable test. There are ways to design tests to catch that sort of thing. Again, it's not my field, but psychiatrists and their test designers deal with this or similar kinds of problems all the time.
 
Last edited:
  • #9
SW VandeCarr said:
All I can say is, if that's the case, you don't have a reliable test. There are ways to design tests to catch that sort of thing. Again, it's not my field, but psychiatrists and their test designers deal with this or similar kinds of problems all the time.

Ya i think the mechanism is that they throw in irrelevant questions to see if people try to fake the test, other than that people can fake it if they are clever and have done their research. I've seen the test myself today.
 

1. How does brain imaging help in diagnosing ADD/ADHD?

Brain imaging techniques, such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and positron emission tomography (PET), allow for the visualization of brain activity and can provide valuable information about the brain's structure and function. In individuals with ADD/ADHD, these imaging techniques can reveal differences in brain activity and structure compared to individuals without the disorder, which can aid in the diagnosis.

2. Is brain imaging a reliable method for diagnosing ADD/ADHD?

While brain imaging can provide useful information for diagnosing ADD/ADHD, it is not a definitive diagnostic tool on its own. Other factors, such as behavioral assessments and medical history, should also be taken into consideration for an accurate diagnosis.

3. Can brain imaging be used to differentiate between ADD and ADHD?

Currently, there is no clear evidence that brain imaging can reliably distinguish between ADD and ADHD. Both disorders have similar patterns of brain activity and structure, making it difficult to differentiate between the two based on imaging alone.

4. Are there any risks associated with brain imaging for diagnosing ADD/ADHD?

Brain imaging techniques, such as fMRI and PET, are non-invasive and generally considered safe. However, there is a potential for false positives or false negatives, and there may be some discomfort associated with being in an enclosed space for the duration of the scan.

5. Can brain imaging be used to monitor the effectiveness of treatment for ADD/ADHD?

Yes, brain imaging can be a useful tool for tracking changes in brain activity and structure over time. This can help clinicians determine if a particular treatment is having a positive impact on an individual's symptoms of ADD/ADHD.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
7
Views
3K
Back
Top