Explore ›
Finding
Finding
improvement
Inhibitory control training was superior to central executive training for improving set shifting accuracy in children with ADHD, with a medium-to-large treatment-by-time interaction and ICT producing improvements across both tasks while CET produced no improvements.
| Effect size | d = 0.63 |
| Follow-up | 10 weeks |
| Comparator | Central executive training (CET) — matched digital therapeutic targeting working memory, identical format, duration, contact, and adaptive algorithms, differing only in the cognitive target |
| Effect summary | improvement; d = 0.63 |
| Effect modifiers | [{"modifier": "ADHD medication status", "interaction_p": "p = .01", "direction": "null", "stratum_details": "Marginally significant main effect of medication status on shifting accuracy (children on medication shifted more accurately overall) but medication status did not interact with treatment or treatment x time interaction (all p > .11, eta-squared < .05)", "plain_language": "Whether the child was on ADHD medication didn't change how much they benefited from either training program for shifting accuracy", "annotation_notes": "Sensitivity analysis. The main effect of medication status was marginally significant (p = .01, BF10 = 1.70, eta-squared = .12) but this was a general effect, not differential by treatment group."}] |
Connected entities
Interventions
Conditions
Outcomes
Populations
Source
PMC10156903
Does Training Working Memory or Inhibitory Control Produce Far-Transfer Improvements in Set Shifting for Children with ADHD? A Randomized Controlled Trial