Quantifying the Relationship between Attention‐Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Experiences of Child Maltreatment: A Meta‐Analysis
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the association between attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and experiences of child maltreatment. This study employed several meta‐analyses. Studies included in the meta‐analysis contained a comparison of experiences of child maltreatment in individuals with and without ADHD or assessed the relationship between ADHD symptoms and experiences of child maltreatment. There were 18 studies that met the eligibility criteria. Individuals with ADHD had higher odds of having been maltreated in childhood compared to individuals without ADHD (odds ratio = 2.39, p < 0.001). There was a significant association between ADHD symptoms and experiences of child maltreatment ( r = 0.28, p < 0.001). Clinicians need to be cognisant of the risk of child maltreatment when working with individuals with ADHD, and vice versa. ‘Examine[s] the association between ADHD and experiences of child maltreatment’
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 it