MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4361270904 · doi:10.1177/10870547231161533

Miss. Diagnosis: A Systematic Review of ADHD in Adult Women

2023· review· en· W4361270904 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Attention Disorders · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyInclusion (mineral)Thematic analysisClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologySystematic reviewPsychiatryMEDLINEQualitative researchSocial psychologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review was to explore the impact of living with undiagnosed ADHD and adult diagnosis on women. METHOD: A systematic literature search was completed using three databases. Eight articles were considered relevant based on strict inclusion criteria. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the results of the articles. RESULTS: Four key themes emerged: Impacts on social-emotional wellbeing, Difficult relationships, Lack of control, and Self-acceptance after diagnosis. CONCLUSION: This knowledge can be used to advance the understanding of ADHD in adult women and the implications for late diagnosis in women.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.317 · 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