MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2594387257 · doi:10.21474/ijar01/3317

AWARENESS OF SAUDI POPULATION IN MADINA REGION ABOUT ATTENTION DEFICIT HYPER-ACTIVE DISORDER (ADHD) IN CHILDREN.

2017· article· en· W2594387257 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Advanced Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttention deficitAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderPsychiatryDiseasePopulationAttention deficit disorderArabicBlamePsychologyMedicineClinical psychologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Attention Deficit Hyper-Active Disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common neurobehavioral developmental disorders among children. The prevalence of ADHD in all Arabic countries in general was ranging from 1.3% to 16% compared to 4-8% in US. While in Korea it was between 7.6% to 9.5%. However, the prevalence was reached 20 % in India. Methodology: A cross sectional study has been set in Saudi Arabia, Madina Region. The study population included both genders from 15 years and above, people living outside Madina and those whom are in the medical field have been excluded.Data were analyzed by the SPSS version 20. Results: . 25.1 % knew the disease through their experience with an ADHD patient known to them. 14.7% read about ADHD through medical websites, 7,3% and 7.6% knew about it from newspapers and social media, respectively. 71.3%, believed that ADHD is a real disease, 22 % believe that it is a behavioral disorder, 16 % consider it as a neurological disease while 18 % considered it as a psychiatric disorder. On the other hand, 31 .8 % believe that ADHD is a mixed disorder and only 11 % did not know anything about the nature of the disease. , 32.2 % believe that it is a genetic disease, 23.1% blame nutritional habits, 19.3% believe that preservatives and dye contents of certain types of the food are the main cause, 4.9 % considered insecticides the main cause ,1.1% connected it to smoking and the rest believe that it is multi-cause disease.5.6% of respondents believe that medical management is the main modality of treatment, 27.1% think that behavioral therapy is main treatment option and 59.8% suggested both modalities and the rest considered it as not a treatable disease.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.473

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.083
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.373 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it