@article{HautmannDoepfnerKatzmannetal.2018,
  author    = {Hautmann, Christopher and D{\"o}pfner, Manfred and Katzmann, Josepha and Sch{\"u}rmann, Stephanie and Wolff Metternich-Kaizman, Tanja and Jaite, Charlotte and Kappel, Viola and Geissler, Julia and Warnke, Andreas and Jacob, Christian and Hennighausen, Klaus and Haack-Dees, Barbara and Schneider-Momm, Katja and Philipsen, Alexandra and Matthies, Swantje and R{\"o}sler, Michael and Retz, Wolfgang and Gontard, Alexander von and Sobanski, Esther and Alm, Barbara and Hohmann, Sarah and H{\"a}ge, Alexander and Poustka, Luise and Colla, Michael and Gentschow, Laura and Freitag, Christine M. and Becker, Katja and Jans, Thomas},
  title     = {Sequential treatment of ADHD in mother and child (AIMAC study): importance of the treatment phases for intervention success in a randomized trial},
  series = {BMC Psychiatry},
  volume    = {18},
  journal   = {BMC Psychiatry},
  doi       = {10.1186/s12888-018-1963-9},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-227930},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {Background The efficacy of parent-child training (PCT) regarding child symptoms may be reduced if the mother has attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The AIMAC study (ADHD in Mothers and Children) aimed to compensate for the deteriorating effect of parental psychopathology by treating the mother (Step 1) before the beginning of PCT (Step 2). This secondary analysis was particularly concerned with the additional effect of the Step 2 PCT on child symptoms after the Step 1 treatment. Methods The analysis included 143 mothers and children (aged 6-12 years) both diagnosed with ADHD. The study design was a two-stage, two-arm parallel group trial (Step 1 treatment group [TG]: intensive treatment of the mother including psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy; Step 1 control group [CG]: supportive counseling only for mother; Step 2 TG and CG: PCT). Single- and multi-group analyses with piecewise linear latent growth curve models were applied to test for the effects of group and phase. Child symptoms (e.g., ADHD symptoms, disruptive behavior) were rated by three informants (blinded clinician, mother, teacher). Results Children in the TG showed a stronger improvement of their disruptive behavior as rated by mothers than those in the CG during Step 1 (Step 1: TG vs. CG). In the CG, according to reports of the blinded clinician and the mother, the reduction of children's disruptive behavior was stronger during Step 2 than during Step 1 (CG: Step 1 vs. Step 2). In the TG, improvement of child outcome did not differ across treatment steps (TG: Step 1 vs. Step 2). Conclusions Intensive treatment of the mother including pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy may have small positive effects on the child's disruptive behavior. PCT may be a valid treatment option for children with ADHD regarding disruptive behavior, even if mothers are not intensively treated beforehand. Trial registration ISRCTN registry ISRCTN73911400. Registered 29 March 2007.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{KaiserAggensteinerHoltmannetal.2021,
  author    = {Kaiser, Anna and Aggensteiner, Pascal-M. and Holtmann, Martin and Fallgatter, Andreas and Romanos, Marcel and Abenova, Karina and Alm, Barbara and Becker, Katja and D{\"o}pfner, Manfred and Ethofer, Thomas and Freitag, Christine M. and Geissler, Julia and Hebebrand, Johannes and Huss, Michael and Jans, Thomas and Jendreizik, Lea Teresa and Ketter, Johanna and Legenbauer, Tanja and Philipsen, Alexandra and Poustka, Luise and Renner, Tobias and Retz, Wolfgang and R{\"o}sler, Michael and Thome, Johannes and Uebel-von Sandersleben, Henrik and von Wirth, Elena and Zinnow, Toivo and Hohmann, Sarah and Millenet, Sabina and Holz, Nathalie E. and Banaschewski, Tobias and Brandeis, Daniel},
  title     = {EEG data quality: determinants and impact in a multicenter study of children, adolescents, and adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)},
  series = {Brain Sciences},
  volume    = {11},
  journal   = {Brain Sciences},
  number    = {2},
  issn      = {2076-3425},
  doi       = {10.3390/brainsci11020214},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-228788},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Electroencephalography (EEG) represents a widely established method for assessing altered and typically developing brain function. However, systematic studies on EEG data quality, its correlates, and consequences are scarce. To address this research gap, the current study focused on the percentage of artifact-free segments after standard EEG pre-processing as a data quality index. We analyzed participant-related and methodological influences, and validity by replicating landmark EEG effects. Further, effects of data quality on spectral power analyses beyond participant-related characteristics were explored. EEG data from a multicenter ADHD-cohort (age range 6 to 45 years), and a non-ADHD school-age control group were analyzed (n\(_{total}\) = 305). Resting-state data during eyes open, and eyes closed conditions, and task-related data during a cued Continuous Performance Task (CPT) were collected. After pre-processing, general linear models, and stepwise regression models were fitted to the data. We found that EEG data quality was strongly related to demographic characteristics, but not to methodological factors. We were able to replicate maturational, task, and ADHD effects reported in the EEG literature, establishing a link with EEG-landmark effects. Furthermore, we showed that poor data quality significantly increases spectral power beyond effects of maturation and symptom severity. Taken together, the current results indicate that with a careful design and systematic quality control, informative large-scale multicenter trials characterizing neurophysiological mechanisms in neurodevelopmental disorders across the lifespan are feasible. Nevertheless, results are restricted to the limitations reported. Future work will clarify predictive value.},
  language  = {en}
}