103 Child Characteristics Associated with Receipt of Methylphenidate (Ritalin)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Methylphendidate (MPH; Ritalin) is widely used as part of the management of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, specific factors associated with its prescription and use are poorly understood. To examine child-related factors that predict children's receiving MPH. Secondary data analysis from Cycle 1 (1994/5; “Time 1”) and Cycle 2 (1996/8; “Time 2”) of the National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth (NLSCY), a prospective longitudinal study of children's development using a nationally representative sample. MPH use was ascertained from an affirmative answer to the question “Does he/she take the following prescribed medication on a regular basis? Ritalin”. In a series of logistic regression analyses, we examined the role of parent and teacher-reported behavioral and emotional problems, including factor scores on dimensions of Hyperactivity-Inattention (HI), Anxiety; and Aggression-Conduct (AC) problems, parent reported academic achievement, chronic health problems, and child's age, sex, and use of MPH, all measured at Time 1, in predicting receiving MPH at Time 2. Complete data were available on 2972 children of school age (age M=8.62 yr; SD=1.78; 49.5% male; 2.2% received MPH). In our first model, both parent (OR: 1.25; 95% CI: 1.15–1.35) and teacher (OR: 1.19; 95% CI: 1.10–1.28) ratings of HI predicted MPH use after adjustment for child's age, sex and use of MPH at Time 1. In our second model, parent ratings of Anxiety (OR: 1.16; 95% CI: 1.05–1.28) and AC problems (OR: 1.13; 95% CI: 1.01–1.26) were also found to predict MPH use over-and-above the factors already described, including ratings of HI. Teacher ratings of Anxiety predicted MPH use (OR: 1.18; 95% CI: 1.07–1.30), while AC appeared to have a protective effect (OR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.73–0.95, an anomalous finding that can be explained as a statistical suppressor effect). In our third model, after controlling for all the above variables, higher level of academic achievement (at Time 1) was found to reduce the likelihood of a child receiving MPH at Time 2 (OR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.76–0.92), while presence of chronic medical problems was unrelated. MPH use in children is clearly a function of multiple child-related factors, including symptoms of ADHD as reported by both parents and teachers, and other behavioral, emotional, and academic characteristics not usually considered primary indications for MPH. Clinicians should be aware that many aspects of the child should be considered when stimulant medications are prescribed and that information from multiple sources contributes to decision-making in this area.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".