Cited by 15Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDevelopmental and Educational Neuropsychology

Forethought in youth with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder: an fMRI study of sex-specific differences

Open access
Poissant, H., Rapin, L., Chenail, S., Mendrek, A.·2016·Psychiatry Journal

Abstract

Objective. The majority of studies investigating neurocognitive processing in attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) have been conducted on male participants. Few studies evaluated females or examined sex differences. Among various cognitive anomalies in ADHD, deficit in forethought seems particularly important as children with ADHD often fail to adequately use previous information in order to prepare for responses. The main goal of this study was to assess sex-specific differences in behavioral and neural correlates of forethought in youth with ADHD. Methods. 21 typically developing (TD) youth and 23 youth with ADHD were asked to judge whether two pictures told a congruent or incongruent story. Reaction time, performance accuracy, and cerebral activations were recorded during functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Results. Significant sex-specific differences in cerebral activations appeared, despite equivalent performance. Relative to the boys TD participants, boys with ADHD had extensive bilateral frontal and parietal hypoactivations, while girls with ADHD demonstrated more scattered hypoactivations in the right cerebral regions. Conclusion. Present results revealed that youth with ADHD exhibit reduced cerebral activations during forethought. Nevertheless, the pattern of deficits differed between boys and girls, suggesting the use of a different neurocognitive strategy. This emphasizes the importance of including both genders in the investigations of ADHD.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1155/2016/6810215

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The small study comparing ADHD and healthy adolescents was severely underpowered with only seven girls.

    “However, the study was severely underpowered with only seven girls (Poissant et al., 2016).”

    From Cognitive Neuroscience of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and Its Clinical Translation (2018) · cites this paper as Poissant et al., 2016

    The Methods (§2.1, page unavailable) report a small comparison of 44 children, including seven girls with ADHD and 12 girls in the control group. This supports the seven-girl count for the ADHD subgroup, but our copy does not establish that the study was severely underpowered; it also did not have only seven girls overall. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In a small study, ADHD males had bilateral frontal and parietal underactivation compared to controls together with hyperactivation of amygdala and superior temporal motivation regions, while ADHD females had a more widespread underactivation pattern in right inferior frontal and postcentral gyri, right culmen, right middle temporal gyrus and left basal ganglia.

    “ADHD males had bilateral frontal and parietal underactivation compared to controls together with hyperactivation of amygdala and superior temporal motivation regions, while ADHD females had a more widespread underactivation pattern in right inferior frontal and postcentral gyri, right culmen, right middle temporal gyrus and left basal ganglia.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [24]Kaufman A. S. Kaufman N. L. Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test 2004 New York, NY, USA John Wiley & Sons

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Poissant, H., Rapin, L., Chenail, S., & Mendrek, A.
Affiliations
  • Université du Québec à Montréal (CA)
  • Bishop's University (CA)
Corresponding author
Poissant, H.
Venue
Psychiatry Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016
Volume
2016
Pages
1-8
ISSN
  • 2314-4327 (ISSN-L)
  • 2314-4335
OpenAlex
W2501345324
Cited by
15
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1
FWCI
1.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychiatry Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • 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, forethought, sex differences, youth, brain activation, gender differences in ADHD

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