Research Forum on Psychological Treatment of Adults With ADHD
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
BACKGROUND: A literature search found five empirical studies of psychological treatment for adults with ADHD, out of 1,419 articles on ADHD in adults. Practice guidelines to date all recommend multimodal intervention, given that a significant number of patients cannot tolerate, do not respond to, or fail to reach optimal outcomes with medication alone. METHOD: This article provides a literature review and the recommendations of a forum of experts in the psychological treatment of adults with ADHD. RESULTS: Empirical studies of brief, structured, and short-term psychological interventions for adults with ADHD to date demonstrate moderate to large effect sizes. Methodological challenges include selection of control groups, broad-based measures of outcome, and the need for larger samples. CONCLUSION: Psychological treatment may play a critical role in the management of adults with ADHD who are motivated and developmentally ready to acquire new skills as symptoms remit.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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