ArticleJournal of the Korean Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry2025
Comprehensive Attention Test as a Diagnostic Tool for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.
Article in Journal of the Korean Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Objectives: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) significantly affects mental health in all age groups; however, its diagnosis remains challenging. This study evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of the Comprehensive Attention Test (CAT), a computerized tool designed to assess various aspects of attention in children with ADHD, in order to provide the groundwork for clinically applicable interpretation guidelines. Methods: Factor analysis was performed on the scores of seven CAT subtests (visual and auditory selective attention tasks, sustained attention task, flanker task, divided attention task, and spatial working memory tasks) collected from 5214 subjects aged 4-49 years diagnosed with ADHD at 15 psychiatric clinics in South Korea. Their scores were compared with those of 500 participants with no attention problems. Results: CAT subtests were grouped into either three or four factors depending on the age group. Omission error, commission error, and response time variability formed either one or two factors that effectively distinguished ADHD from non-ADHD with high sensitivity and specificity (4-5 years old: areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROCs] 0.937 and 0.779; 6-8 years old: AUROCs 0.841 and 0.878; 9-18 years old: AUROC 0.864; 19-49 years old: AUROC 0.792). The mean response time and working memory test results formed separate factors. While mean response time was a poor diagnostic indicator of ADHD, it revealed significant differences when psychiatric comorbidities were present. Conclusion: CAT results can be categorized into factors reflecting inattentiveness, disinhibition, and working memory. These factors may help diagnose ADHD or detect psychiatric comorbidities.
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.