MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3048500871 · doi:10.22215/etd/2017-12209

Childhood Trauma and ADHD Diagnosis as Predictors of Consistently Elevated Internalizing Symptoms

2017· dissertation· en· W3048500871 on OpenAlexaff
Tyler R. Pritchard

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyDepression (economics)Clinical psychologyMaladaptationPsychologyPsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many children adapt well to life after trauma, but children with ADHD may be at risk for posttraumatic maladaptation.ADHD is often comorbid with mental health disorders and deficits in cognitive functioning.Using data from the Multimodal Treatment of Children with ADHD study, a randomized clinical trial that tested treatments for ADHD in 579 children and later recruited 289 comparison children, the present study tests whether trauma predicts more severe levels and faster increases in depression and anxiety for children with ADHD versus developmentally typical peers.Interpersonal trauma predicted elevated depression and anxiety symptom severity, but not trajectories.Natural trauma predicted elevated anxiety symptoms, but not trajectories.Last, ADHD diagnosis predicted elevated depression symptoms, but not trajectories.There were no trauma x ADHD interactions on symptom levels or trajectories.This study informs practice and policy by guiding practitioners to use trauma history to identify children who demonstrate persistent internalizing symptoms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.299 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder→French-language works237,207→