Comparing Executive Function of Normal Children with ADHD Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>This study was conducted to compare with the executive function of ADHD versus normal male and female children. To obtain this objective, 30 ADHD children referring a private psychological center for the first time who had taken no medication for this disorder, and 30 normal children from one of the schools of District 14 in Tehran were selected randomly who were of the same age and gender of ADHD children. Wisconsin test was used as a measurement tool. Results showed that there is a significant difference between the average scores of the executive function of normal and ADHD children as well as average scores of the executive function of normal boys and ADHD children at the 0.01 level. In addition, there was a significant difference between the average scores of the executive function of normal girls and ADHD girls at the 0.05 level according to which null hypothesis is rejected. Therefore, ADHD children are of lower executive and cognitive function compared to normal children and have extensive cognitive deficits. Therefore, they require medications along with special training and rehabilitation.</p>
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".