MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019656937 · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2011.00084

A Systematic Review of Global Publication Trends Regarding Long-Term Outcomes of ADHD

2012· review· en· W2019656937 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paul Hodgkins, L. Eugene Arnold, Monica Shaw, Hervé Caci, Jennifer Kahle, Alisa G. Woods, Susan Young

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychiatry · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderPsychiatryPsychologyMedicineClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is increased global recognition of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) as a serious medical condition with long-term consequences. Although originally conceived of as a childhood disorder, ADHD is being increasingly recognized in adults. Individual geographic regions may have specific interests and objectives for the study of ADHD. A systematic review of long-term outcomes (LTOs) in ADHD was conducted to evaluate research on ADHD LTOs on a global scale. Studies that were at least 2 years in duration were examined. A total of 351 studies were identified in the final analysis. We identified nine outcomes of interest and classified studies by specific geographical regions, age groups studied and study design by region and over time. Published studies of LTOs in ADHD have increased in all geographical regions over the past three decades, with a peak number of 42 publications in 2008. This rise in publications on ADHD LTOs may reflect a rise in global interest and recognition of consequences and impairment associated with ADHD. Although many world regions have published on ADHD LTOs, the majority of studies have emerged from the US and Canada, followed by Europe. While investigators in the US and Canada were predominantly interested in drug addiction as a LTO, European researchers were more interested in antisocial behavior, and Eastern Asian investigators focused on both of these LTOs as well as self-esteem. Geographical differences in the focus of ADHD LTO studies may reflect regional variations in cultural values. Proportionally fewer prospective longitudinal studies and proportionally more retrospective and cross-sectional studies have been published in more recent decades. Finally, more studies focusing on ADHD in adolescents and adults have been conducted in recent years, and particularly adolescents in Eastern Asia. These changes in basic study design may reflect an increase in the recognition that ADHD is a lifetime chronic disorder. This systematic review analysis of publication trends in ADHD LTOs reflects geographically based interests that change over time.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations57
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PsychiatrySame topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderFrench-language works237,207