The Relationship Between Cortical Thickness and Executive Function Measures in Children With and Without ADHD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is characterized by inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity; however, other executive function dysregulation is common, including inhibition and working memory. This study aims to identify CT differences based on executive function performance in individuals with and without ADHD. METHODS: Data for this study was acquired from the Adolescent Brain and Cognitive Development (ABCD) database (61 ADHD, and 61 age and sex matched controls). General linear models were used to assess relationships between measures, CT, and diagnosis. RESULTS: We found a significant relation between CT and working memory scores in the right precentral area. Additionally, we found significant interactions between CT, diagnosis, and measure outcome in the Flanker assessment (in the left fusiform area) and the attention score of the CBCL (in the right precentral region). CONCLUSION: This suggests that there may be different relationships that exist between CT and executive function in children with ADHD.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".