Systematic Review of Measures Used to Diagnose Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in Research on Preschool Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in preschool children is challenging because the behavioral manifestations of the disorder are T not uncommon for many children this age. Therefore, the assessment of ADHD in preschoolers needs to be multifaceted and requires the use of a variety of assessment measures. A systematic review of the literature from 1985 through to 2005 found 38 relevant articles related to ADHD in preschool children. We extracted the assessment measures used to identify ADHD in preschoolers and categorized them into 4 core areas of measurement: standardized rating scales, structured interviews, direct observations of behavior, and direct measures of attention and hyperactivity—impulsivity. We examined quality indicators, such as symptom description, psychometric properties, and logistics, for the most frequent measures in each measurement areas. Our review of the literature highlights the need for more developmentally appropriate measures in 3 of the 4 core areas.
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 | 0.036 | 0.187 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.026 | 0.029 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".