4.5 Review

Electrophysiological biomarkers of diagnosis and outcome in neurodevelopmental disorders

期刊

CURRENT OPINION IN NEUROLOGY
卷 28, 期 2, 页码 110-116

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/WCO.0000000000000181

关键词

attention deficit hyperactivity disorder; autism spectrum disorder; biomarkers; electroencephalography

资金

  1. Department of Psychiatry, UCLA
  2. NIMH [K23MH094517]
  3. [NS80160]
  4. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH [K23MH094517] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  5. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE [R21NS080160] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose of review The heterogeneity in clinical presentation and outcome in neurodevelopmental disorders such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) autism spectrum disorder (ASD) necessitates the identification and validation of biomarkers that can guide diagnosis, predict developmental outcomes, and monitor treatment response. Electrophysiology holds both practical and theoretical advantages as a clinical biomarker in neurodevelopmental disorders, and considerable effort has been invested in the search for electroencephalography (EEG) biomarkers in ADHD and ASD. Recent findings Here, we discuss the major themes in the evaluation of biomarkers and then review studies that have applied EEG to better inform diagnosis, focusing on the controversy surrounding the theta:beta ratio in ADHD; prediction of risk, highlighting recent studies of infants at high risk for ASD; and treatment monitoring, presenting new efforts in the redefinition of outcome measures in clinical trials of ASD treatment. Summary We conclude that insights gained from EEG studies will contribute significantly to a more mechanistic understanding of these disorders and to the development of biomarkers that can assist with diagnosis, prognosis, and intervention. There is a need, however, to utilize approaches that accommodate, rather than ignore, diagnostic heterogeneity and individual differences.

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