MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210683095 · doi:10.1080/87565641.2022.2032713

Inhibitory Control, Conduct Problems, and Callous Unemotional Traits in Children with ADHD and Typically Developing Children

2022· article· en· W4210683095 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniel A. Waschbusch, Dara E. Babinski, Whitney D. Fosco, Sarah M. Haas, James G. Waxmonsky, Nancy Garon, Shana Nichols, Sará King, Darcy A. Santor, Brendan F. Andrade

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Neuropsychology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of OttawaMount Saint Vincent UniversityMount Allison University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNova Scotia Health Research Foundation
KeywordsPsychologyInhibitory controlStop signalResponse inhibitionTask (project management)Conduct disorderDevelopmental psychologyInhibitory postsynaptic potentialAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderSelection (genetic algorithm)Typically developingClinical psychologyAudiologyNeuroscienceCognitionMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Compared children with CP/ADHD, CPCU/ADHD, ADHD-only, and controls on two measures of inhibitory control: a Simon/flanker task that measured response selection and a stop signal task that measured response inhibition. Results showed: (a) ADHD was associated with both measures of inhibitory control; (b) control children had better overall performance and ADHD-only had worse response selection than the CP groups; and (c) children with CPCU/ADHD had better response inhibition than children with ADHD-only or CP/ADHD. Results suggest inhibitory control dysfunction is associated with ADHD rather than CP and that response inhibition dysfunction distinguishes children with CP/ADHD from children with CPCU/ADHD.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.810

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental NeuropsychologySame topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderFrench-language works237,207