Oppositional Defiant Disorder Rating Scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, the authors report the psychometric properties of a parent-completed rating scale based on the criteria for oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders— Fourth Edition—Text Revision ( DSM-IV-TR). Mothers of 294 boys and 48 girls with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and 53 boys and 45 girls without behavior problems completed the Oppositional Defiant Disorder Rating Scale (ODDRS). Fathers of 44 boys with ADHD also completed the scale,and 71 mothers of boys with ADHD provided 1-year test—retest data.The ODDRS had high internal consistency, high interrater reliability, and moderate 1-year test—retest reliability.The scale had one principal component and correlated as expected with related subscales from the Child Behavior Checklist and with overreactive parenting. Scores were not significantly correlated with parent or child age or with socioeconomic status.The strong psychometric properties indicate that this measure holds considerable promise for briefly assessing ODD in a manner consistent with the DSM-IV-TR.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.010 |
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".