Item Response Theory Analysis of ADHD Symptoms in Children With and Without ADHD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Item response theory (IRT) was separately applied to parent- and teacher-rated symptoms of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) from a pooled sample of 526 six- to twelve-year-old children with and without ADHD. The dimensional structure ADHD was first examined using confirmatory factor analyses, including the bifactor model. A general ADHD factor and two group factors, representing inattentive and hyperactive/impulsive dimensions, optimally fit the data. Using the graded response model, we estimated discrimination and location parameters and information functions for all 18 symptoms of ADHD. Parent- and teacher-rated symptoms demonstrated adequate discrimination and location values, although these estimates varied substantially. For parent ratings, the test information curve peaked between -2 and +2 SD, suggesting that ADHD symptoms exhibited excellent overall reliability at measuring children in the low to moderate range of the general ADHD factor, but not in the extreme ranges. Similar results emerged for teacher ratings, in which the peak range of measurement precision was from -1.40 to 1.90 SD Several symptoms were comparatively more informative than others; for example, is often easily distracted ("Distracted") was the most informative parent- and teacher-rated symptom across the latent trait continuum. Clinical implications for the assessment of ADHD as well as relevant considerations for future revisions to diagnostic criteria 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.
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 | 0.026 | 0.074 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".