Screening for Adulthood ADHD and Comorbidities in a Tertiary Mental Health Center Using EarlyDetect: A Machine Learning-Based Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Screening for adult Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and differentiating ADHD from comorbid mental health disorders remains to be clinically challenging. A screening tool for ADHD and comorbid mental health disorders is essential, as most adult ADHD is comorbid with several mental health disorders. The current pilot study enrolled 955 consecutive patients attending a tertiary mental health center in Canada and who completed EarlyDetect assessment, with 45.2% of patients diagnosed with ADHD. The best ADHD classification model using composite scoring achieved a balanced accuracy of 0.788, showing a 2.1% increase compared to standalone ADHD screening, detecting four more patients with ADHD per 100 patients. The classification model including ADHD with comorbidity was also successful (balanced accuracy = 0.712). The results suggest the novel screening method can improve ADHD detection accuracy and inform the risk of ADHD with comorbidity, and may further inform specific comorbidity including MDD and BD.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".