MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126506202 · doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00227

Neuropsychological profiles of adolescents with ADHD: effects of reading difficulties and gender

2002· article· en· W2126506202 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyNeuropsychologyStroop effectAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderCognitionExecutive functionsDevelopmental psychologyAudiologySpellingWorking memoryClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Executive function, particularly behavioral inhibition, has been implicated as a core deficit specific to Attention‐Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) whereas rapid naming has been implicated as a core deficit specific to reading disabilities (RD). Females may be less impaired in executive function although adolescent females with ADHD have yet to be studied. Method: Neuropsychological profiles of four adolescent groups aged 13–16 with equal female representation were investigated: 35 ADHD, 12 RD, 24 ADHD+RD, and 37 normal controls. A semi‐structured interview (K‐SADS‐PL), the Conners Rating Scales and the Ontario Child Health Study Scales were used to diagnose ADHD. RD was defined as a standard score below 90 on at least one of the following: Reading or Spelling of the WRAT3 or Word Attack or Word Identification of the WRMT‐R. The WISC‐III, Rapid Automatized Naming, Stroop and Stop tasks were used as measures of cognitive and executive function. Results: The two ADHD groups (ADHD, ADHD+RD) showed deficits in processing speed, naming of objects, poor behavioral inhibition and greater variability in reaction times whereas the two RD groups (RD, RD+ADHD) showed verbal working memory deficits and slower verbal retrieval speed. Only the comorbid group was slower with naming of numbers and colors and had slower reaction times. Regression analyses indicated that incongruent color naming (Stroop) and variability in go reaction time were the best predictors of hyperactive/impulsive ADHD symptoms whereas variability in go reaction time and processing speed were the best predictors of inattentive ADHD symptoms. Speed of letter naming and verbal working memory accounted for the most variability in composite achievement scores. No gender differences were found on any of the cognitive tests. Conclusions: This study challenges the importance of behavioral inhibition deficits in ADHD and that naming deficits are specific to RD. Further investigation into cognitive deficits in these groups is required. ADHD: Attention‐Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder; RD: Reading Difficulties; SES: socio‐economic status; CTRS: Conners' Teacher Rating Scale; OCHSS: Ontario Child Health Study Scales; WRAT: Wide Range Achievement Test; WRMT: Woodcock Reading Mastery Test; MDD: Major Depressive Disorder; SAD: Separation Anxiety Disorder; GAD: Generalized Anxiety Disorder; OCD: Obsessive Compulsive Disorder; WISC: Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children; RAN: Rapid Automatized Naming; SSRT: Stop Signal Reaction 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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.285 · 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