MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2808502010 · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000010923

Are ADHD medications under or over prescribed worldwide?

2018· article· en· W2808502010 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Carlos Renato Moreira Maia, Rafael Massuti, Luca Tessari, Fausto Campani, Glaucia Chiyoko Akutagava‐Martins, Samuele Cortese, Luís Augusto Rohde

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePsycINFOMEDLINECINAHLImpulsivityAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderPsychiatryPopulationData extractionFamily medicineClinical psychologyPsychological interventionEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a common neurodevelopmental disorder, characterized by age inappropriate and impairing levels of inattention and/or hyperactivity/impulsivity. Pharmacotherapy is an important part of the ADHD multimodal treatment. The extent to which ADHD is pharmacologically over or under treated worldwide is controversial. We aimed to estimate the pooled worldwide rate of ADHD pharmacological treatment in individuals with and without the disorder. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: We will include published or unpublished studies reporting the rates of ADHD pharmacological treatment in participants with and without ADHD of any age group. Population-based, cohort, or follow-up studies, as well as data from insurance health system and third-party reimbursements will be eligible. Searches will be performed in a large number of electronic databases, including Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Scopus. The primary outcome will be the prevalence of ADHD pharmacological treatment in individuals with ADHD and without ADHD. Two independent reviewers will perform the screening, and data extraction process. Study quality/bias will be assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale by 2 independent reviewers. To test the robustness of the findings, we will perform a series of sensitivity and meta-regression analysis. Analyses will be performed with R and STATA software. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No IRB approval will be necessary. The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis will be presented at international conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. REGISTRATION AND STATUS: PROSPERO 2018 CRD42018085233.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.086
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.086
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.005
Bibliometrics0.0070.014
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.104
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicineSame topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderFrench-language works237,207