MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3104045384 · doi:10.1101/248484

Utility of the SWAN Scale for ADHD Trait-Based Genetic Research: A Validity and Polygenic Risk Study

2018· preprint· en· W3104045384 on OpenAlexafffund
Christie L. Burton, Leah Wright, Janet Shan, Bowei Xiao, Annie Dupuis, Tara Goodale, S‐M Shaheen, Elizabeth C. Corfield, Paul Arnold, Russell Schachar, Jennifer Crosbie

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHospital for Sick Children
KeywordsPsychologyClinical psychologyAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderAnxietyConvergent validityTraitDiscriminant validityPopulationPsychopathologyPsychiatryPsychometricsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Valid and genetically-informative trait measures of psychopathology collected in the general population would provide a powerful complement to case/control genetic designs. We report the convergent, predictive and discriminant validity of the parent- and the self-report versions of the Strengths and Weaknesses of ADHD Symptoms and Normal Behavior Rating Scale (SWAN) for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) traits. We tested if SWAN ADHD scores were associated with ADHD diagnosis, ADHD polygenic risk, as well as with traits and polygenic risk for co-occurring disorders such as anxiety and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Methods We collected parent- and self-report SWAN scores in a community sample (n=15,560; 6-18 years of age) and created norms. Sensitivity-specificity analyses determined SWAN cut-points that discriminated those with a community ADHD diagnosis (n=972) from those without a community diagnosis. We validated cut-points from the community sample in a clinical sample (266 ADHD cases; 36 controls). We tested if SWAN scores were associated with anxiety and obsessive-compulsive (OC) traits and polygenic risk for ADHD, OCD and anxiety disorders. Results Both the parent- and the self-report SWAN measures showed high convergent validity with established ADHD measures and distinguished ADHD participants with high sensitivity and specificity in the community sample. Cut-points established in the community sample discriminated ADHD clinic cases from controls with a sensitivity of 86% and specificity of 94%. High parent- and self-report SWAN scores and scores above the community-based cut-points were associated with polygenic risk for ADHD. High ADHD traits were associated with high anxiety traits, but not OC traits. SWAN scores were not associated with OCD or anxiety disorder polygenic risk. Conclusion The parent- and self-report SWAN are potentially useful in genetic research because they predict ADHD diagnoses and are associated with ADHD polygenic risk.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder→French-language works237,207→