Cognitive Aspects of Hyperactivity and Overactivity in Preadolescents with Tourette Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Attention deficit disorder with hyperactivity (ADHD) is a common comorbidity in children with Tourette syndrome (TS). However, motor restlessness and high levels of sensorimotor activation or "overactivity" may be a feature of TS rather than a distinct ADHD comorbidity. The link between overactivity and ADHD in TS has yet to be established and in particular between adult and preadolescent manifestations. The current study furthers this understanding of ADHD features in TS by investigating the relationship between cognitive and behavioral aspects of ADHD and TS. The style of planning (STOP) overactivity scale was compared in preadolescent (n = 17) and adult (n = 17) samples. The STOP overactivity scale measures the characteristic overactive style of planning in everyday life. The aims of the study were twofold as follows: (1) to see if an overactive style was present in adolescents as well as in adults, and (2) to see if this overactive style correlated with hyperactivity, impulsivity, or perfectionism. Results suggest that overactivity may be a better description of the hyperactivity manifestations in TS. Behavioral components of overactivity were present in preadolescents while the cognitive components were more frequent in adults. Overactivity relates at the same time to perfectionism and impulsivity.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".