The term Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) has a long history of problems behind it. The origin of all these problems lies in the lack of agreement in the assessment procedures and evaluation instruments. The diagnosis is clinical and is determined by the observation and information provided by parents and teachers. So, this is highly subjective and leads to disparate results. Therefore, on the one hand the inaccuracy of the diagnosis of ADHD, which has been based on subjective criteria, together with the fact that hyperactivity is one of the main symptoms of this disorder, implies that several studies (with limitations) have been carried out to record objective measures of movement in subjects in at least the last ten years. In order to solve some of this derived problems and limitations of previous studies, a computer program has been developed to objectively record the amount of movement of subjects. The main objective of this study is threefold: first to register the amount of movement of both experimental group and control group, then to compare them with the movement registered by observers and finally to determine the validity of the software developed as a tool to support the diagnosis of ADHD. Results show that there are significant differences in the amount of objective movement between a clinical group of subjects with ADHD and a control group, obtaining a higher average of movement the experimental group. In addition, results also demonstrate that the developed software is a valid tool for the evaluation of movement that solves the limitations of previous studies. The proposed tool is developed from different aspects to give it a multidisciplinary character.

中文翻译：

---

客观分析多动症患者的运动。针对课堂学生的多学科控制工具。

注意缺陷多动障碍（ADHD）一词具有悠久的历史。所有这些问题的根源在于评估程序和评估工具之间缺乏共识。诊断是临床的，由家长和老师的观察和信息确定。因此，这是非常主观的，并导致不同的结果。因此，一方面基于主观标准的多动症诊断不准确，再加上多动症是该疾病的主要症状之一，这意味着已经进行了数项研究（有局限性）至少在过去十年中记录对象的运动的客观度量。为了解决其中一些衍生的问题和先前研究的局限性，已经开发出一种计算机程序来客观地记录对象的运动量。这项研究的主要目标是三个方面：首先记录实验组和对照组的运动量，然后将它们与观察者记录的运动进行比较，最后确定作为支持该运动的工具而开发的软件的有效性。诊断多动症。结果表明，临床多动症患者组与对照组之间的客观运动量存在显着差异，实验组的运动平均值更高。此外，结果还表明，开发的软件是评估运动的有效工具，可以解决先前研究的局限性。