In the current study, we also included an ADHD clinical contrast group to test whether our neurobehavioral profile was specific to the effects of AE. This comparison is critically important given the high rate of ADHD in the AE population and the difficulty in clinically differentiating non-exposed children with ADHD from children with AE, especially in the absence of physical dysmorphology (Fryer et al., 2007). In the third set of analyses, we were able to accurately classify 59.8% of the AE subjects and 75.7% of the ADHD subjects, which was statistically significant. Thus, the neurobehavioral measures that distinguish AE subjects from controls can also be used to distinguish AE subjects from those with ADHD. While statistically significant, however, the relatively low classification rate for the AE subjects means that this profile is less desirable from a clinical perspective. Interestingly, the ability to classify subjects with ADHD was higher than the ability to accurately classify the AE subjects suggesting that this profile has stronger specificity than sensitivity in relation to AE. In addition, when analyses were conducted without subjects from the
