ArticleBasic and clinical neuroscience
Comparing Theta Beta Ratio in Children With Attention-deficit/hyperactive Disorder and Specific Learning Disorder During Active EEG.
Article in Basic and clinical neuroscience. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Data-Driven Neurocognitive Clustering Predicts Virtual Reality Task Performance in Children: A Pilot Study.Brain sciences · 2026Article
- Electrophysiological evaluation of cognitive intervention outcomes in children with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
- State sensitivity and five-year longitudinal stability of resting-state EEG biomarker candidates in healthy adults.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2026Article
- Attachment Style, Task Difficulty, and Feedback Type: Effects on Cognitive Load.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Theta-to-beta ratio (TBR) has been claimed as a biomarker to diagnose attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, the effectiveness of this index in identifying different groups of ADHD is still under discussion. Our primary purpose was to determine to what extent active TBR can differentiate between children with ADHD and specific learning disorder (SLD) as the most common comorbid disorder. Methods: Two groups of school-aged children with SLD (n=15) and ADHD (n=15) were diagnosed through a process of clinical interview and observation. Electroencephalography (EEG) was recorded in both groups during active conditions. The implemented cognitive task was the visual continuous performance task (VCPT). TBR in sites of CZ and Fz and cognitive measures of VCPT were calculated in the study groups. Results: There were no significant differences in cognitive measures (commission, omission, reaction time, and variability of reaction times) shown in two matched groups of children with SLD and ADHD. According to TBR, the two groups demonstrated no significant differences in comparison. Conclusion: TBR cannot be considered a reliable biomarker to differentiate between those groups of psychological disorders that contain primary cognitive deficits and require the allocation of attention and working memory loads.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.