Current trends in medicalisation: Universalising <scp>ADHD</scp> diagnosis and treatments
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
Abstract There is a wide sociological debate that documents how inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsive behaviours from a certain point forward cease to be disturbing behaviours and become childhood psychiatric disorders—named attention deficit/hyperactivity disorders (ADHD)—to be responded to with specific treatments since these behaviours are supposed to have a negative or pervasive impact on social and personal functioning and quality of life. Looking back over the stages of this debate, the article will focus on what, in recent years, are the two main directions of the expansion of the domain of medicalisation: on the one hand, discussing how the ADHD category has changed by moving from being typically a childhood problem to a disorder that can affect adults and, on the other, how it tends to globalise conquering new markets outside the United States, Canada, and Australia. The article concludes commenting on how the processes of lifelong expansion and worldwide diffusion is universalising the medical category, overcoming the disciplinary and geographical boundaries in which ADHD was created and developed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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