4.5 Article

Differential Attention Functioning in Pediatric Chronic Kidney Disease

期刊

FRONTIERS IN HUMAN NEUROSCIENCE
卷 16, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2022.897131

关键词

attention dimensions; chronic kidney disease; end-stage kidney disease; attention; cognition

资金

  1. Renal Research Institute
  2. Maternal Child Health Bureau [MCJ379154A]
  3. General Clinical Research Centers program of the Division of Research Resources, National Institutes of Health [RR00046]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Children with chronic kidney disease may have specific deficits in multiple attention dimensions, particularly for those with more severe disease.
ObjectiveTo compare specific attention functions for school-age children with chronic kidney disease (CKD) to those of a typically developing control group. MethodsA cross-sectional study examined attention dimensions for children and adolescents with CKD (n = 30) in comparison to a typically developing control group (n = 41). The CKD group consisted of those receiving maintenance dialysis (n = 15) and those with mild/moderate CKD treated conservatively (n = 15). Measures aligning with Mirsky's conceptual multidimensional model of attention were selected to compare groups across five dimensions of attention: Focus/Execute, Sustain, Stability, Shift, and Encode. ResultsSignificant group differences were revealed, with the CKD group performing worse than controls on the Focus/Execute, Sustain, and Encode dimensions. The CKD group also had a larger proportion of children with scores one standard deviation or more below the mean on the Shift and Encode domains, suggesting an at-risk level of functioning in these dimensions. Secondary analyses showed disease severity to be correlated with worse attention functions for children with CKD. ConclusionChildren with CKD may be vulnerable to subtle, specific deficits in numerous attention dimensions relative to their typically developing peers, particularly for those with more severe disease.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据