Response inhibition in children with and without ADHD after traumatic brain injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and traumatic brain injury (TBI) show deficient response inhibition. ADHD itself is a common consequence of TBI, known as secondary ADHD (S-ADHD). Similarity in inhibitory control in children with TBI, S-ADHD, and ADHD would implicate impaired frontal-striatal systems; however, it is first necessary to delineate similarities and differences in inhibitory control in these conditions. We compared performance of children with ADHD and those with TBI without pre-injury ADHD on a stop signal, response inhibition task. Participants were 274 children aged 6-14 years. There were 92 children with ADHD, 103 children with TBI, and 79 typically developing children who served as controls. Among the TBI participants, injury severity ranged from mild to severe. Children with ADHD and TBI showed deficient inhibition. The deficit in children with ADHD was as great as or greater than that in children with TBI, regardless of degree of TBI severity or the presence of S-ADHD. The finding indicates that TBI results in deficient inhibition regardless of the development of S-ADHD.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".