Clinical Presentation of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in Preschool Children: The Preschoolers with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Treatment Study (PATS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe the clinical presentation of preschoolers diagnosed with moderate to severe attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) recruited for the multisite Preschool ADHD Treatment Study (PATS). The diagnosis and evaluation process will also be described. METHOD: A comprehensive multidimensional, multi-informant assessment protocol was implemented including the semistructured PATS Diagnostic Interview. Parent and teacher-report measures were used to supplement information from interviews. Consensus agreement by a cross-site panel on each participant's diagnoses was required. Analyses were conducted to describe the sample and to test associations between ADHD severity and demographic and clinical variables. RESULTS: The assessment protocol identified 303 preschoolers (3-5.5 years) with moderate to severe ADHD Hyperactive/Impulsive or Combined type. The majority of participants (n = 211, 69.6%) experienced co-morbid disorders, with oppositional defiant disorder, communication disorders, and anxiety disorders being the most common. Participants with co-morbid communication disorders were found to be more anxious and depressed. ADHD severity was found to correlate with more internalizing difficulties and lower functioning. Although boys and girls had similar symptom presentations, younger children had significantly higher ADHD severity. CONCLUSIONS: Preschoolers with moderate to severe ADHD experience high co-morbidity and impairment, which have implications for both assessment and treatment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".