A Cross-Sectional Comparative Study of Sleep Disturbances in Children with ADHD and Matched Controls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Systematic reviews conducted on sleep disturbances in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) have found inconsistent results due to the presence of several moderating variables which were not controlled for in previous studies. The aim of this study was to examine sleep disturbances in children with ADHD compared to their typically developing peers after controlling for moderating variables (age, sex, medication status, body mass index, and psychiatric and medical comorbidities). Methods: ADHD was diagnosed using DSM-IV-TR criteria (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) and Conners’ Parent Rating Scales. Children recruited (aged 6−12 years) for the ADHD group (n = 40) met the following criteria: IQ > 80, unmedicated, and no psychiatric or medical comorbidities. The control group consisted of age- and sex-matched typically developing peers (n = 40). Sleep was assessed subjectively (through parent reported questionnaires and sleep logs) and objectively (using video polysomnography). Results: 65% of children with ADHD had a sleep disorder, as compared to 17% of controls. The ADHD group reported more sleep disturbances and disorders, both on subjective measures and objective measures. Conclusions: Sleep disturbances and primary sleep disorders in children with ADHD exist independent of moderating variables and differences in sleep assessment methods, thereby bolstering support for previously documented literature on the ADHD and sleep connection.
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 | 0.001 | 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".