Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29706587›Full record

ArticleBiological psychiatry. Cognitive neuroscience and neuroimaging2018

Frontostriatal Dysfunction During Decision Making in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder.

Luke J Norman, Christina O Carlisi, Anastasia Christakou, Clodagh M Murphy, Kaylita Chantiluke, Vincent Giampietro, Andrew Simmons, Michael Brammer, David Mataix-Cols, Katya Rubia

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biological psychiatry. Cognitive neuroscience and neuroimaging, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Risk calculation circuit abnormalities plus psychosocial risk variables predict problematic substance use in youth with externalizing disorders.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Atypical action updating in a dynamic environment associated with adolescent obsessive-compulsive disorder.Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Luke J NormanDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College, London, United Kingdom; Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Electronic address: luken@umich.edu.
Christina O CarlisiDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College, London, United Kingdom; Division of Psychology and Language Sciences, Department of Clinical, Education and Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Anastasia ChristakouCentre for Integrative Neuroscience and Neurodynamics, School of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences, University of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom.
Clodagh M MurphyDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College, London, United Kingdom; Department of Forensic and Neurodevelopmental Sciences, Sackler Institute for Translational Neurodevelopmental Sciences, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College, London, United Kingdom; Behavioural Genetics Clinic, Adult Autism Service, Behavioural and Developmental Psychiatry Clinical Academic Group, South London and Maudsley Foundation NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom.
Kaylita ChantilukeDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College, London, United Kingdom.
Vincent GiampietroDepartment of Neuroimaging, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College, London, United Kingdom.
Andrew SimmonsDepartment of Neuroimaging, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College, London, United Kingdom; National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre for Mental Health, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom; Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Center for Alzheimer Research, Division of Clinical Geriatrics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Michael BrammerDepartment of Neuroimaging, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College, London, United Kingdom.
David Mataix-ColsDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Centre for Psychiatry Research, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Katya RubiaDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College, London, United Kingdom.
King's College London · GBKarolinska Institutet · SEUniversity of Reading · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council G0300155
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of the current paper is to provide the first comparison of computational mechanisms and neurofunctional substrates in adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and adolescents with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) during decision making under ambiguity.

methodsSixteen boys with ADHD, 20 boys with OCD, and 20 matched control subjects (12-18 years of age) completed a functional magnetic resonance imaging version of the Iowa Gambling Task. Brain activation was compared between groups using three-way analysis of covariance. Hierarchical Bayesian analysis was used to compare computational modeling parameters between groups.

resultsPatient groups shared reduced choice consistency and relied less on reinforcement learning during decision making relative to control subjects, while adolescents with ADHD alone demonstrated increased reward sensitivity. During advantageous choices, both disorders shared underactivation in ventral striatum, while OCD patients showed disorder-specific underactivation in the ventromedial orbitofrontal cortex. During outcome evaluation, shared underactivation to losses in patients relative to control subjects was found in the medial prefrontal cortex and shared underactivation to wins was found in the left putamen/caudate. ADHD boys showed disorder-specific dysfunction in the right putamen/caudate, which was activated more to losses in patients with ADHD but more to wins in control subjects.

conclusionsThe findings suggest shared deficits in using learned reward expectancies to guide decision making, as well as shared dysfunction in medio-fronto-striato-limbic brain regions. However, findings of unique dysfunction in the ventromedial orbitofrontal cortex in OCD and in the right putamen in ADHD indicate additional, disorder-specific abnormalities and extend similar findings from inhibitory control tasks in the disorders to the domain of decision making under ambiguity.

Indexed as

RewardAdolescentAttention Deficit Disorder with HyperactivityChildCorpus StriatumDecision MakingFunctional NeuroimagingHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleObsessive-Compulsive DisorderPrefrontal CortexADHDComputational modelingDisorder specificityfMRIOCDReward

Identifiers

PMID29706587
PMCPMC6278892
OpenAlexW2792086414

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.