Medication dispensing for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder to New Zealand youth.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Global trends show an increase in medication dispensing for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in young people over time. The current study aimed to examine whether similar trends were observed in New Zealand youth over the period of 2007/08 to 2016/17. METHODS: We estimated the prevalence in ADHD medication dispensing using national pharmaceutical data for each fiscal year from 2007/08 to 2016/17 in approximately 2.4 million New Zealand youth aged 1-24 years. We also examined whether trends varied by sociodemographic factors. RESULTS: The total dispensing prevalence almost doubled from 516 per 100,000 to 996 per 100,000 over the study period. Males had a consistently higher dispensing prevalence relative to females. Young people aged 7-17 years had the highest dispensing prevalence. The most deprived quintile had a slightly lower dispensing prevalence relative to other quintiles. Ethnic differences in dispensing prevalence were apparent, with deprivation differences also existing within most ethnic groups. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our study showed an increase in ADHD medication use by young people in New Zealand, similar to international findings. Further research is needed into why disparities in dispensing prevalence occur across ethnic and socioeconomic groups.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".