Parental psychopathology in families of children with attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder and exposed to maternal smoking during pregnancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Both genetic and environmental factors have been implicated in the etiology of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). We had previously suggested that exposure to maternal smoking during pregnancy (MSDP) may be a valid basis for delineating a distinct subtype of ADHD, where children exposed to MSDP present with a more severe clinical picture. Here, we examine the psychopathology of parents in this group, to better understand the etiology of ADHD. METHODS: Using the Family Interview for Genetic Studies in a sample of 514 families of children with ADHD, we collected data pertaining to lifetime parental psychopathology. Families were stratified based on maternal smoking during the complete gestational period. The frequency of different disorders was compared using the χ2 statistic. RESULTS: In the group where mothers smoked during pregnancy, both parents were significantly more likely to have antisocial personality disorder, and problems with alcohol and drug abuse. Mothers had a significantly higher frequency of major depressive disorder (MDD), while fathers showed a trend for both MDD and bipolar disorder. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the pattern of psychopathology in parents of children exposed to MSDP, as well as earlier reports of the severe clinical, behavioral, and cognitive phenotype in these children, combined with the large body of epidemiological evidence, we propose that these children present a distinct subtype of ADHD with comorbid conduct disorder. Furthermore, we propose that MSDP may be a proxy measure to help delineate this subtype.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".