Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and addictions (substance and behavioral): Prevalence and characteristics in a multicenter study in France
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The aim of this study is to determine the possible links between attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and the presence of concomitant addictions with or without substance use in a French student population. MEASURES: A battery of questionnaire measuring socioeconomic characteristics, university curriculum, ADHD (Wender Utah Rating Scale and Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale), substance consumptions (alcohol, tobacco, and cannabis), and behavioral addictions [(eating disorders (SCOFF)], Internet addiction (Internet Addiction Test), food addiction (Yale Food Addiction Scale), compulsive buying (Echeburua's), and problem gambling (The Canadian Problem Gambling Index)] and measures of physical activity (Godin's Leisure Time Exercise Questionnaire) was filled up by university students in Rouen and Nanterre in France. RESULTS: A total of 1,517 students were included (472 from Paris Nanterre and 1,042 from Rouen). The mean age was 20.6 years (SD = 3.6) and the sex ratio male to female was 0.46. The prevalence of ADHD among the students (current ADHD with a history of ADHD in childhood) was 5.6%. A quarter (25.7%) of students had already repeated their university curriculum, compared to 42.2% among the students with ADHD. Students with possible ADHD had repeated classes more often and believed to have a lower academic level than the students without ADHD. Significant differences were found as students with ADHD were less likely to succeed in their studies (repeated classes more often) than non-ADHD students, and considered their academic level to be lower. They also had significantly higher scores on substance (alcohol, cannabis, and tobacco) as well as behavioral addictions (gambling, compulsive buying disorder, eating disorders, and Internet addiction). CONCLUSION: It seems essential to determine students' problems and propose interventions adapted to students' needs, in order to reduce the negative impact on their future academic and global successes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".