External validation of a bifactor model of oppositional defiant disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dimensions of irritability and defiant behavior, though correlated within the structure of ODD, convey separable developmental risks through adolescence and adulthood. Irritability predicts depression and anxiety, whereas defiant behavior is a precursor to antisocial outcomes. Previously we demonstrated that a bifactor model comprising irritability and defiant behavior dimensions, in addition to a general factor, provided the best-fitting structure of ODD symptoms in five large datasets. Herein we extend our previous work by externally validating the bifactor model of ODD using multiple regression and multivariate behavior genetic analyses. We used parent ratings of DSM IV ODD symptoms, and symptom dimensions for ADHD (i.e., inattention and hyperactivity-impulsivity), conduct disorder (CD), depression/dysthymia, and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) from 846 6-18-year-old twin pairs. We found that the ODD irritability factor was associated only with depression/dysthymia and GAD and the ODD defiant behavior factor was associated only with inattention, hyperactivity-impulsivity, and CD, whereas the ODD general factor was associated with all five symptom dimensions. Multivariate behavior genetic analyses found all five symptom dimensions shared genetic influences in common with the ODD general, irritability, and defiant behavior factors. In contrast, the defiant behavior factor shared genetic influences uniquely with inattention and hyperactivity-impulsivity, whereas the irritability factor shared genetic influences uniquely with depression/dysthymia and GAD, but not vice versa. This suggests that genes that influence irritability in early childhood also predispose to depression and anxiety in adolescence and adulthood. These multivariate genetic findings also support the external validity of the three ODD dimensions at the etiological level. Our study provides additional support for subtyping ODD based on these symptom dimensions, as in the revisions in the ICD-11, and suggests potential mechanisms underlying the development from ODD to behavioral or affective disorders.
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 | 0.051 | 0.111 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".