MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W175325145 · doi:10.1093/pch/5.1.19

School board survey of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder: Prevalence of diagnosis and stimulant medication therapy

2000· article· en· W175325145 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michael Sgro, Wendy Roberts, Sharon R. Grossman, Tony Barozzino

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStimulantAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderMedicineEpidemiologyPsychiatryPediatricsDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), a well described, common problem affecting school-aged children, has an estimated prevalence in Ontario of 7% to 10% of boys and 3% of girls in the age range of four to 11 years. There has been a documented trend to increased use of stimulant medications in the treatment of this disorder in the United States. OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence of stimulant medication therapy for ADHD in three southern Ontario school boards. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional epidemiological study was performed by distributing a survey to all parents of children in kindergarten through grade 6 in six to eight schools selected randomly in each of the three participating school boards. The completed questionnaires were collated, and the comparative data were analyzed using chi(2). RESULTS: A total of 5100 surveys were distributed among the three school boards; 1465 (28.8%) questionnaires were returned completed. Within the three school boards - Hastings County Board of Education, Metropolitan Toronto Separate School Board and the East York Board of Education - the prevalence of ADHD for the age groups surveyed was 4.3%, 3.4% and 6.8%, respectively (average 4.7%), with a peak average of almost 9% by 12 years of age. The percentages of children with diagnosed ADHD who were on stimulant medication were 43%, 3% and 13%, respectively. The differences between the school boards were statistically significant (P<0.05). The male versus female prevalence of a diagnosis of ADHD was 7.1% versus 1.2%, 3.8% versus 3.3% and 10.1% versus 3.6%, respectively, with a combined school board average of 7.1% of males versus 2.9% of females. The average percentage of males versus females who were diagnosed with ADHD and who were on stimulant medication was found to be 27% versus 5%. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of ADHD was 4.7% in the study population. The overall percentage of children who were on stimulant medication was approximately 1%. Males were not only more likely to be diagnosed with ADHD but also more likely to be treated with stimulant medications if diagnosed. There was an increased prevalence of ADHD with older age, and the different school boards had significant differences in both the percentages of children who were diagnosed with ADHD and the percentages of children who were on medication, suggesting that individual school board policies or other factors may affect both the rate of diagnosis and the likelihood of stimulant drug treatment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.647
Threshold uncertainty score0.711

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderFrench-language works237,207