A chart review study of the Inattentive and Combined Types of 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
Studies of the clinical correlates of the subtypes of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) have identified differences in the representation of age, gender, prevalence, comorbidity, and treatment. We report retrospective chart review data detailing the clinical characteristics of the Inattentive (IA) and Combined (C) subtypes of ADHD in 143 cases of ADHD-IA and 133 cases of ADHD-C. The children with ADHD-IA were older, more likely to be female, and had more comorbid internalizing disorders and learning disabilities. Individuals in the ADHD-IA group were two to five times as likely to have a referral for speech and language problems. The children with ADHD-IA were rated as having less overall functional impairment, but did have difficulty with academic achievement. Children with ADHD-IA were less likely to be treated with stimulants. One eighth of the children with ADHD-IA still had significant symptoms of hyperactivity/impulsivity, but did not meet the DSM-IV threshold for diagnosis of ADHD-Combined Type. The ADHD-IA subtype includes children with no hyperactivity and children who still manifest clinically significant hyperactive symptomatology but do not meet DSM-IV criteria for Combined Type. ADHD-IA children are often seen as having speech and language problems, and are less likely to receive medication treatment, but respond to medical treatment with improvement both in attention and residual hyperactive/impulsive symptoms.
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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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