Trajectories of oppositional defiant disorder severity from adolescence to young adulthood and substance use, mental health, and behavioral problems.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) is a disruptive behavioral disorder; however, increasing evidence emphasizes irritable mood as a primary symptom of ODD. Objectives: This study investigated whether heterogeneous groups (classes) of individuals can be differentiated based on ODD sub-dimensions (irritability and defiance) or on overall ODD symptoms longitudinally. We also examine associations between ODD trajectory class and comorbid substance use (heavy episodic drinking, cannabis use), mental health (depression and anxiety) and behavioral symptoms (ADHD, aggression and substance use) in both adolescence and young adulthood (controlling for adolescent levels of each of these concerns). Method: Data were from a randomly recruited community sample of 662 Canadian youth (T1 ages 12-18) followed biennially for 10 years (T6 ages 22-29). Results: = 70; 10.6%) ODD classes. Class trajectory differences were similarity based on symptoms severity (rather than type) for symptom sub-dimensions (irritability defiance). Adolescent and young adult substance use, mental health symptoms, and behavioral problems were significantly higher for the High ODD trajectory class compared to both other classes. Youth in the Moderate ODD trajectory class also showed higher comorbid symptoms in adolescence and young adulthood, compared to the Low ODD trajectory class. Conclusion: Early identification of children and adolescents with high or moderate ODD symptoms and interventions that simultaneously address defiance and irritability are supported by the findings.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".