The Validity of the ADHD Section of the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children
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
The purpose of this study was to assess the concurrent criterion validity of the attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) portion of the National Institute of Mental Health Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children-IV (NIMHDISC-IV). Fifty-seven adolescent participants were divided into three groups on the basis of whether participants met criteria for ADHD on caretaker and adolescent responses on the DISC: (a) 18 participants for whom both the caretakers and adolescents endorsed ADHD, (b) 17 participants for whom the caretakers but not the youth endorsed ADHD, and (c) a clinical control group with no ADHD diagnosis (n = 22). These three groups were compared across parent, teacher, and adolescent checklists; clinician diagnosis; and three objective measures of behavior (continuous performance task, actigraphy monitoring, and a structured observation). Findings lend partial support to the concurrent criterion validity of the ADHD section of DISC.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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