## 4 Discussion  
The present study supports the utility of the inattention subscale (belonging to EDAH scale) in predicting a patient's performance in a VR-CPT (more specifically, AULA Nesplora). These results coincide with previous investigations, which suggested a strong relationship between the presence of inattention symptoms and a significantly high number of omission errors and slow response time [20; 21; 22; 23]. Additionally, the results also showed that the remaining subscales from the EDAH scale (EDAH subscale, related to hyperactive symptoms, and EDAH subscale, related to conduct disorder symptoms) did not significantly predict any particular variable from the VR-CPT. These findings are in the line of previous studies [29], which discussed the difficulty of determining what type of symptoms of ADHD are most dominant. The fact that the EDAH subscale referred to hyperactive symptoms did not predict that any variable from VR-CPT could be due to the fact that CPT are solely based on measuring different Executive Functions (EF). In this sense, there are some clinical studies that support the view that EF deficits, although found in many individuals in groups of children and adolescents who suffer ADHD, are not a necessary feature of ADHD and, therefore, the EDAH subscales based on DSM criteria (and, more particularly, the Hyperactive subscale) are not taking them into account [30; 31]. Similarly, this study also resulted in another unexpected finding, since inattention symptoms were capable to predict an 80.4% of performance in the commission variable from the VR-CPT. This result could be partially explained by the fact that EF deficits are mainly related to inattentive rather than impulsive-hyperactive symptoms [32]. Considering the present findings, the following question is posed: is ADHD a single diagnostic category or is it better to talk about two different disorders? Children with the inattentive presentation of ADHD frequently show non-specific attention problems, which are associated with deficient sensory processes, poorly focused attention and less accurate information processing. Understandably, these problems mainly lead to learning disabilities [33]. However, children with predominantly impulsive-hyperactive or combined presentations of ADHD do not have general attention problems like those mentioned in the previous case. These subtypes are more associated with memory retrieval problems, disruptive behavior, and peer rejection [15; 33]. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Independent variables:** & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Dependent Variables: VR-CPT Variables**} \\ \cline{2-4}
**EDAH Scale** & **Omissions** & **Commissions** & **Response Time** \\ \hline EDAH.AD \(\beta\) (\(t\)) & 0.411 (2.765 **) & 0.615 (3.162 **) & 0.782 (3.558 **) \\ EDAH. H \(\beta\) (\(t\)) & 0.240 (1.254) & \(-\)0.049 (\(-\)0.208) & \(-\)0.451 (0.652) \\ EDAH.CD \(\beta\) (\(t\)) & 0.256 (1.256) & 0.334 (1.342) & 0.334 (1.342) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* **Note.**\(\beta\) = Standardized beta coefficient; \(t\) = Student t coefficient; \(R^{2}\) = variance explained; EDAH.AD = Items of EDAH scale related to Attention Deficit; EDAH. H = Items of EDAH scale referred to Hyperactive symptoms; EDAH. CD = Items about Conduct Disorder symptoms; **\(p<0.01\);**\(p<0.001\).  
\end{table} 
Table 2: Regression models to predict performance in the VR-CPT variable. Similarly, the results also suggested the importance of carrying out an objective assessment of ADHD, not only considering the symptoms of ADHD contained in DSM-5 manual, but also taking into account the patient's own performance in a CPT, in order to contrast the two different types of measures (symptoms collected by observational scale and variables collected by a CPT). As many protocols recommend [24; 25], it is highly relevant to use several assessment tools with the same patient, to ensure the objectivity of the diagnosis process.