MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008104109 · doi:10.1080/03033910.2012.708899

A biofeedback-based programme to improve attention and impulsivity in adults with ADHD

2012· article· en· W2008104109 on OpenAlexaff
Simona Salomone, Jacqueline M. Shanahan, Jessica Bramham, Redmond G O’Connell, Ian H. Robertson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Irish Journal of Psychology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
FundersHealth Research Board
KeywordsImpulsivityPsychologyPsychoeducationBiofeedbackMethylphenidateStimulantClinical psychologyArousalPsychiatryAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderCognitionNeurofeedbackPsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), a neuropsychiatric condition characterised by attention and impulsivity problems, is one of the most common behavioural disorders in Ireland. The first-line treatment for ADHD is psycho-stimulant medication. However, these can have limited effectiveness, particularly in adults, and are often associated with adverse side-effects. It is thus imperative that new non-pharmaceutical approaches to treatment are developed. This study aims to combine psychoeducation with skin-conductance biofeedback to train adults with ADHD to increase their arousal. The training focuses on everyday problems of inattentiveness and impulse control and participants identify goals to which they learn to apply self-initiated alerting techniques. Participants are assessed at baseline, immediately following the 5-week training period, and after 3 months. Pre- and post-training goals ratings are also recorded. Research methods and preliminary outcomes are presented.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations9
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Irish Journal of PsychologySame topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderFrench-language works237,207