Social Support in Children With ADHD: An Exploration of Resilience
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
OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the role of perceived social support in promoting emotional well-being among children with ADHD. Specifically, it examined how children with ADHD perceive support from key individuals in their lives and the relationships between this support and aspects of emotional well-being. Main versus buffering models of social support in the context of social preference status were also explored. METHOD: Participants were 55 school-age children with ADHD-combined or hyperactive/impulsive (ADHD-C/HI). Parent and child ratings evaluated source-specific social support, social status, and aspects of self-concept, anxiety, and depression. RESULTS: Children with ADHD reported lower social support than normative samples. Social support had moderate positive associations with self-concept, with source-specific differences, but was not associated with internalizing symptoms. Regression models with social preference status supported a main effect model of perceived social support. CONCLUSION: Social support may provide a target for resilience-based interventions among children with ADHD in promoting their self-concept and well-being.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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