Characterizing the ASD–ADHD phenotype: measurement structure and invariance in a clinical sample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) have considerable overlap, supporting the need for a dimensional framework that examines neurodevelopmental domains which cross traditional diagnostic boundaries. In the following study, we use factor analysis to deconstruct the ASD-ADHD phenotype into its underlying phenotypic domains and test for measurement invariance across adaptive functioning, age, gender and ASD/ADHD clinical diagnoses. METHODS: Participants included children and youth (aged 3-20 years) with a clinical diagnosis of ASD (n = 727) or ADHD (n = 770) for a total of 1,497 participants. Parents of these children completed the Social Communication Questionnaire (SCQ), a measure of autism symptoms, and the Strengths and Weaknesses of ADHD and Normal Behaviour (SWAN) questionnaire, a measure of ADHD symptoms. An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed on combined SCQ and SWAN items. This was followed by a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and tests of measurement invariance. RESULTS: EFA revealed a four-factor solution (inattention, hyperactivity/impulsivity, social-communication, and restricted, repetitive, behaviours and interests (RRBI)) and a CFA confirmed good model fit. This solution also showed good model fit across subgroups of interest. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that a combined ASD-ADHD phenotype is characterized by two latent ASD domains (social communication and RRBIs) and two latent ADHD domains (inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity). We established measurement invariance of the derived measurement model across adaptive functioning, age, gender and ASD/ADHD diagnoses.
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 | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".