Finding True Friendships: The Friendship Experiences of Adolescents With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The friendship experiences of adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) were explored in this qualitative study. Nine 16- to 18-year old adolescents with ADHD participated in semi-structured interviews that were analyzed using a modified grounded theory framework. They reported chronic peer rejection, loneliness, and conflictual relationships with friends in childhood and early adolescence (theme 1). Although many participants reported becoming resigned to being friendless in adolescence (theme 2), the transition to high school where they could find peers who were similar to them helped them develop close friendships (theme 3). The core theme, Finding True Friendships: The Long Journey from Isolation to Acceptance, integrates the findings and illustrates the developmental and contextual factors influencing the friendship experiences of adolescents with ADHD. The participants provided specific suggestions about how parents, teachers, peers, and mental health professionals might support children and adolescents with ADHD who struggle with peer relations and friendships that formed the basis of the discussion of the clinical implications of the findings.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".