Adherence to Life-Style Recommendations and Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Population-Based Study of Children Aged 10 to 11 Years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The incidence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) among children and youth is high, and temporal increases have been paralleled by deteriorating life-styles. Poor diet quality, physical inactivity, poor sleep habits, and sedentary behaviors have all been associated with ADHD. However, no earlier prospective study has examined the independent and combined importance of meeting established life-style recommendations in childhood for ADHD in adolescence. We examined the associations of adherence to life-style recommendations with the incidence of ADHD and the utilization of health services associated with ADHD. METHODS: Life-style survey among 10- and 11-year-old students (N = 3436) was linked to administrative health data. Associations between adherence to nine established life-style recommendations with ADHD diagnosis and number of physician visits for ADHD until age 14 years were examined using Cox proportional hazard and negative binomial regression. RESULTS: Before age 14 years, 10.8% of students received an ADHD diagnosis. Meeting recommendations for vegetables and fruit, meat and alternatives, saturated fat, added sugar, and physical activity was associated with fewer ADHD diagnoses. Compared with children who met one to three recommendations, meeting seven to nine recommendations was associated with substantially lower incidence of ADHD and fewer physician visits related to ADHD (hazard ratio = 0.42 [95% confidence interval = 0.28-0.61]; rate ratio = 0.38 [95% confidence interval = 0.22-0.65]). CONCLUSIONS: Life-style recommendations exist to benefit development and physical health. Their promotion comes at no harm and may have benefits for ADHD. Experimental evidence is needed to clarify the potential bidirectional relationship between ADHD and adverse health behaviors.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".