The effects of medication on intraocular pressure in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: A prospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common psychiatric conditions in childhood. Psychopharmacological therapy is an effective treatment for ADHD. In this study, we primarily aim to investigate the effects of psychopharmacological agents on intraocular pressure (IOP) in children with ADHD. The sample included 82 children with ADHD and 36 healthy children aged between 8 and 12 years who were referred to the Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry in Hatay State Hospital, Hatay, Turkey. Children with ADHD were divided into two groups according to the medication used: methylphenidate (MPH) group and atomoxetine (ATX) group. Before treatment and after 1- and 6-month treatment period, IOP was measured by Goldmann applanation tonometry. There were no statistical differences in terms of age, gender, and IOP between the three groups (P > 0.05). After 1- and 6-month treatment, the IOP did not change significantly between baseline and 1 month or 6 months (P > 0.05). Children with ADHD may have an IOP similar to healthy children. Six-month treatment with MPH or ATX may not cause significant changes in IOP.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".