Actigraphy and Parental Ratings of Sleep in Children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: To assess various sleep parameters in latency-aged children with ADHD and their normally developing peers through the use of multiple sleep measures. DESIGN: Six sleep parameters were evaluated for two groups of children, ADHD and normal comparison. Each group consisted of 25 children (20 males, 5 females) who ranged in age from 7 to 11 years. All children underwent rigorous diagnostic procedures and the ADHD subjects were selected only if they displayed pervasiveness in their symptomatology and were medication naive. Parents completed a retrospective questionnaire which evaluated sleep problems over the past six months. Additionally, each child wore an actigraph for seven consecutive nights, and the child's parents completed a sleep diary during this time period. SETTING: N/A. PATIENTS OR PARTICIPANTS: N/A. INTERVENTIONS: N/A. RESULTS: Based on the findings from the questionnaire, parents of children with ADHD reported significantly more sleep problems than parents of normally developing children. However, the majority of these sleep differences were not verified through actigraphy or sleep diary data, with the exception of longer sleep duration for children with ADHD and parent reports that describe increased bedtime resistence. It was also found that child-parent interactions during bedtime routines were more challenging in the ADHD group. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the possibility of intrinsic sleep problems such as longer sleep duration, results indicate that many of the sleep problems of children with ADHD may be due to challenging behaviours during bedtime routines. The reason for discrepancies among sleep studies employing objective measures as well as between retrospective and prospective measures are discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it