Relative Age Effect in Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder at Various Stages of the Medicalization Process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diagnosis and pharmacological treatment of ADHD are more common among the youngest children in a classroom, born in the months immediately preceding the school entry cutoff date. The mechanisms behind this phenomenon, called the relative age effect (RAE), are not yet well understood. Nearly all hypotheses involve the school system, various teachers' actions, and concern children's immaturity. However, most previous studies have been based on reports of health professionals' diagnoses and prescriptions found in official databases rather than on reports of teachers' behavior identification or suspicion of ADHD, despite their being at the first stages of the medicalization process. Our study overcomes this limitation by using reports of parents' and teachers' behavior identification or suspicion of ADHD within a three-level multilevel survey design, comprising 1294 children, 130 teachers, and 17 elementary public schools. The goal of our study was to investigate whether RAE stems (1) from adults' judgement of the child's expression of immaturity or (2) from the consequences associated with the child's double burden of being immature and exhibiting ADHD behaviors. Our multilevel analyses put forward the first hypothesis only, supporting the medicalization of immaturity. RAE in ADHD seems mostly initiated by teachers' pre-diagnostic actions toward younger children.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".