Hospital-Based Modified Cogmed Working Memory Training for Youth With ADHD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated a modified working memory training program, Cogmed, for ADHD youth. METHOD: Forty youth were randomized to modified Cogmed training (MCT) or treatment as usual (CON). MCT was delivered in an outpatient mental health clinic in 3 weekly 35-minute sessions with a dedicated coach for 10 weeks. Participants completed assessments at baseline, after the intervention, and again 3 months later. RESULTS: After controlling for baseline, groups were comparable on working memory, academics, and ADHD symptoms. The MCT group was rated by parents and teachers as having fewer executive function challenges and youth endorsed better self-concept compared with the CON group. CONCLUSIONS: MCT was associated with some improvement, which could not be attributed to increased working memory capacity and may reflect other facets of the program. Results question the usefulness of Cogmed but highlight considerations for optimizing adherence, engagement, and the therapeutic alliance in interventions for ADHD youth.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".