MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2761538503 · doi:10.1177/1087054717735380

Friendship Quality in Adolescents With ADHD

2017· article· en· W2761538503 on OpenAlex
Alan Rokeach, Judith Wiener

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

VenueJournal of Attention Disorders · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFriendshipPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: This study compared the quality of friendships (same- and other-sex) in adolescents with and without ADHD, across age and gender. Method: A community sample of 115 participants (61 ADHD, 54 Comparison), ages 13 to 18, completed a questionnaire assessing perceived levels of social support and negative interactions experienced in their friendships. Results: Ratings of friendship social support diminished across age in youth with ADHD, but increased in typically developing youth. Adolescents with and without ADHD, however, did not differ on ratings of negative interactions experienced in their friendships. Compared with males, females rated their friendships to be more supportive, irrespective of ADHD status. Adolescents with and without ADHD rated their same-sex friendships to be simultaneously more supportive and more conflictual than their other-sex friendships. Conclusion: Assessments of adolescents with ADHD should include a careful examination of their social functioning with particular attention devoted to the quality of their friendships.

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)0.000
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.319 · 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