Academic Skills in Pediatric Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: A Preliminary Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is a prevalent and debilitating illness that often begins in childhood and has a significant impact on the functioning of youth and their families. Given that schooling represents a considerable portion of youth's lives and is a key contributor to their development, identifying impacts of OCD on school performance is important. METHODS: The present study evaluated academic skill differences in OCD-affected youth age 7 to 18 (n = 25) compared with matched healthy controls (HCs; n = 25), as captured via standardized testing. Analysis of variance was used to examine group effects on the outcome variables. RESULTS: In comparison with HCs, OCD-affected youth presented with significantly poorer performance in math calculation (P = .029), although mean scores fell in the normative range. Thirty-six percent of the OCD group were in the Below Average range, compared with 12% of the HCs (P = .047). There were no significant between-group differences in word reading or spelling. Academic skills were not associated with symptom severity. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that underperformance in math may be present in a higher-than-expected proportion of OCD-affected youth. Further studies of academic skills are warranted to replicate the current findings and to examine roles of academic enhancers in this vulnerable population.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".