Biomedical subjects

C Timoneda-Gallart

Publications and source records attributed to C Timoneda-Gallart.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMedDate not supplied

[Behavioral phenotypes: cognitive and emotional explanation].

INTRODUCTION: We present a series of Behavioural phenotypes treated with neurocognitive and neuroemotional procedure. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A sample of 26 cases were selected according to qualitative methodology from neuropediatric patients. The method was based on using the PASS theory of intelligence to approach the cognitive problem and the theory of masquerade behaviour as self-defence to solve the emotional problem. Both theories have neurological bases. DN:CAS battery was utilized for assessment of cognitive processes. On the other hand, analysis of cases was carried out doing data analysis with video recorder device. RESULTS: All cases were considered responder cases although in different degree. The responder was defined as the patient which reached better intellectual achievement with respect to cognitive function and which gave up, at least partially, masquerade Behaviour with respect to emotional function. DISCUSSION: The Behaviour of the Behavioural phenotypes has neurological rationale. The PASS theory and the planning, in particular, supported by prefrontal cortex justifies consistently some behaviours. The masquerade Behaviour theory is explained by the fear emotional response mechanism which means emotion is a cerebral processing with neurological rationale. CONCLUSIONS: The Behavioural phenotypes are Behaviours and every Behaviour can be explained by neurological reasons both cognitive and emotional reasons. So, they can be treated by a cognitive and emotional procedure understood in the light of the neurology.

Adolescent↗

PubMedDate not supplied

[Dyslexia as a disfunction in successive processing].

INTRODUCTION: We present a study on reading and writing difficulties after normal instruction during a year. OBJECTIVE: Verifying if these patients showed a specific pattern of PASS (Planning, Attention, Sequential and Simultaneous) cognitive processing; if so, it allows us a rapid diagnosis and a useful cognitive remediation according to the PASS theory of intelligence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty patients were selected from neuropediatric patients because of learning disability. They were selected according to their performance on several tests of phonological aware and a test of writing to discover errors in spelling. Patients with verbal language problems, as in dysphasia, and patients with learning difficulty not determined by reading or writing were ruled out. A control group of 300 scholars was used. The translated DN:CAS battery was administered to the study group and the control group for assessing the PASS cognitive processing. Statistical factorial analysis of the control group was performed as a validity confirmation to discriminate the four PASS cognitive processes. Cluster analysis of the study group was performed to discriminate its homogeneity. Differences between means were tested with the t-Student. RESULTS: The four PASS cognitive processes were identified in the control group. The study group scored less than minus 1 SD in successive processing, the rest of the processes being clearly higher than minus 1 SD, and the mean of study group was inferior to control group (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: A kind of dyslexia may be defined by disfunction in PASS successive processing.

Child↗

PubMedDate not supplied

[PASS neurocognitive dysfunction in attention deficit].

INTRODUCTION: Attention deficit disorder shows both cognitive and behavioral patterns. OBJECTIVE: To determine a particular PASS (planning, attention, successive and simultaneous) pattern in order to early diagnosis and remediation according to PASS theory. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 80 patients were selected from the neuropediatric attendance, aged 6 to 12 years old, 55 boys and 25 girls. Inclusion criteria were inattention (80 cases) and inattention with hyperactive symptoms (40 cases) according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-IV). Exclusion criteria were the criteria of phonologic awareness previously reported, considered useful to diagnose dyslexia. A control group of 300 individuals, aged 5 to 12 years old, was used, criteria above mentioned being controlled. DN:CAS (Das-Naglieri Cognitive Assessment System) battery, translated to native language, was given to assess PASS cognitive processes. Results were analyzed with cluster analysis and t-Student test. Statistical factor analysis of the control group had previously identified the four PASS processes: planning, attention, successive and simultaneous. RESULTS: The dendrogram of the cluster analysis discriminated three categories of attention deficit disorder: 1. The most frequent, with planning deficit; 2. Without planning deficit but with deficit in other processes, and 3. Just only a few cases, without cognitive processing deficit. Cognitive deficiency in terms of means of scores was statistically significant when compared to control group (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: According to PASS pattern, planning deficiency is a relevant factor. Neurological planning is not exactly the same than neurological executive function. The behavioral pattern is mainly linked to planning deficiency, but also to other PASS processing deficits and even to no processing deficit.

Attention↗

PubMedDate not supplied

[Emotional behaviors as a neurological dysfunction].

INTRODUCTION: The hypothesis of the emotional component of behaviors can be explained by a specific neurological mechanism was stated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A sample of 749 cases, all between 5 and 14 year old, with different behavioral and cognitive problems was selected from attendance to the Neuropediatric/Neuropsychopedagogic Unit from 1994 to 2000. A sub sample of 20 cases with PASS planning processing scoring less than 1SD was also selected. A design of mainly qualitative research according to case analysis was followed, behavioral data being provided by patients and their parents and analyzed with video recorder assistance. To avoid the study to be biased techniques as triangulation were applied. Quantitative cognitive data were obtained by using DN:CAS battery for diagnosis of PASS processing. A procedure for diagnosis and treatment of behaviors, previously reported, was followed. The cases of the sub sample were tested before and after emotional treatment without cognitive remediation, the results being tested by Student t. RESULTS: The responders were 82% according to not only the criterion of solution of the behavioral problem, for example, anorexia, psychosomatism, non neurological paroxysm an so on, but also, the sufficient amelioration assessed by the patients, their parents and the researchers. All cases, however, were required the disappearance of observable defensive behaviors in enough quantity to deduce an important maturation change. Significant difference was observed in planning. DISCUSSION: Defensive behaviors as masquerade behaviors are explained in the light of neurological reasons. The neurological processing of the sensibility of danger is emphasized according to the most recent knowledge. CONCLUSION: All behaviors can activate the neurological processing of danger feeling

Adolescent↗

PubMedDate not supplied

[Topiramate and epilepsy in the light of Das-Naglieri Cognitive Assessment System].

INTRODUCTION: Cognitive side effect is a possible effect of topiramate. Cognitive function is not unanimously defined and a test measures according to the concept is based on. On the other hand, behavioral dysfunction is frequent in epileptics and the euthimic effect of topiramate on impulsive dysfunction is known. AIMS: To asses the cognitive effect of topiramate with a modern battery, Das-Naglieri Cognitive Assessment System (DN:CAS), which diagnoses mental programs, but not only achievement. Also, to test the influence of topiramate on behavior. PATIENTS AND METHODS: As a prospective study, 35 patients with idiopathic or cryptogenic epilepsies were administered DN:CAS battery, and, simultaneously, patients and parents were given behavioral questionnaires at baseline, and after 6 and 12 months on topiramate. Cognitive scores were compared to those of a group of healthy controls at baseline, and baseline scores were compared to 6 and 12 months follow-up scores within the patient group. t-Student was applied. RESULTS: Patient scores were lower in successive processing before treatment as compared to controls (p < 0.001). After 6 months no change was noted. After 12 months of treatment, patients scored significantly better in planning processing than before treatment (p = 0.04) and, moreover, improved behavioral scores were noted. CONCLUSIONS: The patients showed a successive processing dysfunction not related with topiramate. An improved planning processing and behavioral pattern were observed 12 months after treatment. According to the euthimic effect of topiramate and the neurocognitive-neuroimpulsive interaction, a positive effect of topiramate on DN:CAS cognition and behavior can be postulated.

Adolescent↗