Race and Ethnicity in Pediatric Ocd: An Exploratory Study of a Clinical North American Sample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Influences of race and ethnicity have received limited attention in pediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), despite noted importance in other psychiatric diseases. We sought to compare racially defined groups presenting to a North American tertiary care pediatric OCD subspecialty clinic. METHODS: Clinician-rated and parent/child-reported information was extracted from a research data registry comprising OCD-affected youth assessed between 2011 and 2018. The study population was aggregated into racial groups, defined as Caucasian, Asian, and "other." Country of origin and spoken language were used as ethnicity proxies. Obsessivecompulsive disorder phenotype, clinical course, and family environment were compared, with inclusion of mixed Asian-Caucasians in post-hoc analyses. RESULTS: Asian youth reported significantly later ages of OCD symptom onset, clinical diagnosis, and treatment compared with Caucasian youth and were significantly less likely to have participated in OCD-specific treatment, despite similar clinician recommendation rates. Obsessivecompulsive disorder severity and comorbidities did not differ across groups. Asian parents reported significantly higher levels of family blame and conflict than Caucasian parents, but similar prevalence of OCD family history. CONCLUSIONS: Clinically relevant differences were identified between Asians and Caucasians, highlighting the need for individualized care that respects the influences of ethnicity and race in pediatric OCD. Replication and future study of additional racial groups is warranted.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".