Clinical Response to Methylphenidate in Children Diagnosed with Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and Comorbid Psychiatric Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine to what extent the clinical response to methylphenidate (MPH) is affected by psychiatric comorbidities in children diagnosed with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHODS: Children (n = 267) aged 6 to 12 years diagnosed with ADHD participated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-week medication trial of MPH. Children were assessed using parent and teacher ratings and laboratory measures. Clinical response to MPH was determined by integrating all obtained measures. RESULTS: Meeting criteria for conduct disorder (CD) was 27.7% of children, 40.8% for oppositional defiant (ODD), 47.2% for anxiety, and 7.9% for depressive disorders. The presence of CD or ODD was associated with good response to MPH. In contrast, children diagnosed with only comorbid anxiety were more likely to receive poor response rating independent of age, sex, or socioeconomic status. Low family income was found to be predictive of good response to MPH. CONCLUSIONS: The response to MPH in children with ADHD may be dependent on the type of comorbid disorder present. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00483106.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".