Assessing medication effects in the MTA study using neuropsychological outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: While studies have increasingly investigated deficits in reaction time (RT) and RT variability in children with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), few studies have examined the effects of stimulant medication on these important neuropsychological outcome measures. METHODS: 316 children who participated in the Multimodal Treatment Study of Children with ADHD (MTA) completed the Conners' Continuous Performance Test (CPT) at the 24-month assessment point. Outcome measures included standard CPT outcomes (e.g., errors of commission, mean hit reaction time (RT)) and RT indicators derived from an Ex-Gaussian distributional model (i.e., mu, sigma, and tau). RESULTS: Analyses revealed significant effects of medication across all neuropsychological outcome measures. Results on the Ex-Gaussian outcome measures revealed that stimulant medication slows RT and reduces RT variability. CONCLUSIONS: This demonstrates the importance of including analytic strategies that can accurately model the actual distributional pattern, including the positive skew. Further, the results of the study relate to several theoretical models of ADHD.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".