Cited by 619Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDevelopmental and Educational Neuropsychology

Differential patterns of striatal activation in young children with and without ADHD

Durston, Sarah, Tottenham, Nim T, Thomas, Kathleen M, Davidson, Matthew C, Eigsti, Inge-Marie, Yang, Yihong, Ulug, Aziz M, Casey, B.J·2003·Biological Psychiatry

Abstract

Background Cognitive control, defined as the ability to suppress inappropriate thoughts and actions, is compromised in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This study examines the neural basis of this deficit.Methods We used a paradigm that incorporates a parametric manipulation within a go/nogo task, so that the number of go trials preceding a nogo trial is varied to tax the neural systems underlying cognitive control with increasing levels of interference.Results Using this paradigm in combination with event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), we show that children without ADHD have increased susceptibility to interference with increasing numbers of go trials preceding a nogo trial, but children with ADHD have difficulty even with a single go trial preceding a nogo trial. In addition, children with ADHD do not activate frontostriatal regions in the same manner as normally developing children, but rather rely on a more diffuse network of regions, including more posterior and dorsolateral prefrontal regions.Conclusions Normal immature cognition may be characterized as being susceptible to interference and supported by the maturation of frontostriatal circuitry. ADHD children show a slightly different cognitive profile at 6 to 10 years of age that is paralleled by a relative lack of or delay in the maturation of ventral frontostriatal circuitry.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0006-3223(02)01904-2

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Prior work reports inferior frontal gyrus engagement on trials where suppression was correctly invoked.

    “This pattern is consistent with prior work using the go nogo paradigm (Durston, Davidson, et al., 2003; Durston, Thomas, Yang, et al., 2002; Luna & Sweeney, 2004), reporting engagement of the inferior frontal gyrus for trials in which suppression was correctly invoked.”

    From Frontostriatal maturation predicts cognitive control failure to appetitive cues in adolescents (2011) · cites this paper as Durston, Davidson, et al., 2003

  • Many functional and structural MRI studies have pointed to a fronto-striatal circuit underlying response inhibition in the Go/NoGo paradigm.

    “Many functional and structural MRI studies have pointed to a fronto-striatal “circuit” underlying response inhibition in the Go/NoGo paradigm (Durston et al. 2003; Wessa et al. 2007).”
  • Functional studies have linked neural anomalies to deficiencies in inhibitory control, conflict resolution, motor control, timing, attention, and working memory.

    “These functional studies have linked neural anomalies to deficiencies in a wide array of neurocognitive processes including inhibitory control (Casey et al., 1997; Durston et al., 2003; Schulz et al., 2004; Schulz et al., 2005a; Tamm, Menon, Ringel, & Reiss, 2004; Vaidya et al., 1998), conflict resolution (Bush et al., 1999; Tamm et al., 2004), motor control (Rubia et al., 1999), timing (Durston”
  • Studies most consistently find deficits in inhibitory control, regulation of attention, working memory, planning, and shifting sets in ADHD.

    “Studies most consistently find deficits in inhibitory control (Barkley, 1997; Casey et al., 1997; Durston et al., 2003), regulation of attention (Pennington, Groisser, & Welsh, 1993; Swanson et al., 1991; Halperin et al., 1993; Johnson et al., 2008), working memory (Castellanos et al., 2002b; Martinussen, Hayden, Hogg-Johnson, & Tannock, 2005), planning (Pennington et al., 1993; Barkley, 1997),”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Durston, S., Tottenham, N. T., Thomas, K. M., Davidson, M. C., Eigsti, I.-M., Yang, Y., Ulug, A. M., & Casey, B. J.
Affiliations
Cornell University (US)
Corresponding author
Durston, Sarah
Venue
Biological Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2003-05
Volume
53
Issue
10
Pages
871-878
ISSN
0006-3223 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2075476435
Cited by
619
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 41 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 34
FWCI
20.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Biological Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
Keywords
attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, cognitive control, striatal activation, frontostriatal circuits, go/no-go task, interference, cognitive maturation, young children, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, ventral striatum
MeSH terms
Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Brain, Child, Cognition Disorders, Corpus Striatum, Female, Frontal Lobe, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Case-Control Studies, Echo-Planar Imaging

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review