Item Response Theory Analysis of ADHD Symptoms in Children With and Without 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
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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