Evaluating the Hyperactivity/Inattention Subscale of the National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: High scores on the National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth Hyperactivity/Inattention Subscale (NLSCY H/I Scale) have been used to indicate severe inattention and overactivity representing Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) symptoms. However, a threshold on the scale has not been identified for use as an epidemiological marker for clinically significant disorder. DATA AND METHODS: The NLSCY H/I Scale is evaluated in a subsample of the cycle 1 NLSCY population (n=10,498), weighted to represent 2.36 million children aged 6 to 11 in 1994/1995. Logistic regression measured the association of scores on the scale against three potential criteria, adjusting for age, sex and socioeconomic status: 1) current methylphenidate use, 2) diagnosed emotional disorder, and 3) functional impairment. Sensitivity analyses identified threshold scores where false positives and false negatives were most nearly equivalent. The preferred criterion provides the greatest area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve and the highest specificity at the identified threshold. RESULTS: Current methylphenidate use and diagnosed emotional disorder yielded essentially identical models, with thresholds of 14 or more and nearly overlapping ROC curves. High scores on the NLSCY H/I Scale are associated with current methylphenidate use and diagnosed emotional disorder. INTERPRETATION: The parent-reported NLSCY H/I Scale can be used in population studies as a highly specific indicator of clinically significant ADHD symptoms.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".