Web-Based Intervention for Teachers of Elementary Students With ADHD: Randomized Controlled Trial
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To test the acceptability, satisfaction, and effectiveness of a web-based intervention for teachers of elementary school-aged children with ADHD. METHOD: Elementary classroom teachers (N = 58), along with their students with ADHD, participated in a randomized controlled trial. The program consisted of six sessions that included evidence-based intervention strategies for reducing ADHD symptoms and impairment in the classroom setting. Teachers also had access to a moderated Discussion Board and an online ADHD coach. Questionnaire data were electronically collected from teachers and parents pre-intervention, post-intervention (6 weeks), and after an additional 6-week follow-up. RESULTS: Intent-to-treat analyses found significant improvements based on teacher (but not parent) reports of core ADHD symptoms and impairment for the Teacher Help for ADHD treatment group. Teachers reported a high level of acceptability and satisfaction. CONCLUSION: Web-based ADHD interventions have the potential to reduce the barriers to treatment utilization and implementation that are common problems for school-based ADHD interventions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it