Efficacy of Methylphenidate in ADHD Children across the Normal and the Gifted Intellectual Spectrum.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study evaluates whether attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) children with a borderline intelligence quotient (IQ) (70≤FSIQ<80), normal IQ (80≤FSIQ<120) and high IQ (FSIQ≥120) respond differently to psychostimulant treatment. METHOD: 502 children, aged 6 to 12 years, with an IQ range from 70 to 150 participated in a two-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover methylphenidate (MPH) trial. RESULTS: In addition to differences in socioeconomic background and parental education, higher IQ children were found to present with less severe symptoms. No significant differences were found with regards to treatment response. CONCLUSION: ADHD children within the normal and high levels of intellectual functioning all respond equally to psychostimulant treatment, and that proper medication management is necessary for all children with the disorder.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".