Attention Deficit Predicts Intellectual Functioning in Children with Neurofibromatosis Type 1

Table 1

Sample characterization of patients with NF1^ADHD, NF1^control, and ADHD^control.

	Corrected means (standard error)
	NF1^ADHD (A)	NF1^control (B)	ADHD^control(C)	(all groups)^a		values (all groups)	Post-hoc comparisons^a
Number	53	28	30	—	—	—	—
Sex (female/male)	20/33	18/10	8/22	—	—	0.010^c	—
Age	8.87 (0.20)	8.36 (0.28)	8.96 (0.27)	1.454	2.175	0.238^d	—
SES (Winkler-index)^b	12.02 (0.64)	13.39 (0.86)	11.13 (0.80)	1.88	18.99	0.159^d	—
Familial type of NF1 (familial/spontaneous)	25/28	9/19	—	—	—	0.240^c	—
Asymptomatic optic nerve glioma (N)	10	3	—	—	—	0.358^c	—
Subtype (ADHD-C/ADHD-I)^f	33/20	—	16/14	—	—	0.490^c	—
Methylphenidate prior to T1 (N)	7	—	2	—	—	0.292^c	—
Conners 3® ADHD-index (T-scores)	62.48 (0.86)	52.93 (1.27)	66.05 (1.07)	31.29	33.58	<0.001^e	A<B; C<B; C<A
Conners 3® global-index (T-scores)	60.22 (1.16)	49.61 (1.72)	65.03 (1.46)	23.17	61.78	<0.001^e	A<B; C<B; C<A
Allowed comorbidities	Number of patients					values (all groups)	Post-hoc comparisons^a
Previous language disorder	14	4	7	—	—	.415^c	—
Unspecific learning disabilities	9	1	1	—	—	.108^c	—
Dyslexia	8	1	6	—	—	.188^c	—
Dyscalculia	5	0	3	—	—	.519^c	—
Depression	0	0	1	—	—	.538^c	—
Anxiety disorders	1	1	1	—	—	.457^c	—
Oppositional defiant disorder	4	0	3	—	—	.325^c	—
Conduct disorder	2	0	2	—	—	.325^c	—

Note: ^a< = “worse than”, even if the score is higher in numbers; ; ; ; ^bThe socio-economic status was measured with the Winkler-Index (3–8 = low, 9–14 = middle, 15–21 = high).^cData was analyzed with χ²-tests; ^dData was analyzed with analyses of variance (ANOVA); ^eData was analyzed with multivariate analyses of covariance (MANCOVA). ^fADHD-C = combined type of ADHD, ADHD-I = inattentive type of ADHD.