Exploring the Relationship of Dietary Intake With Inattention, Hyperactivity, and Impulsivity, Beyond ADHD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study investigates the association between dietary intake and ADHD diagnosis and its dimensions in adolescents. METHODS: In the KOALA Birth Cohort Study, 810 adolescents aged 16 to 20 years provided information on ADHD diagnosis and completed a food frequency questionnaire. Dietary patterns were extracted using Principal Component Analysis. Parents reported on ADHD symptoms using the Conners' Parent Rating Scale-Revised Short form, and the Impulsivity subscale from the Temperament in Middle Childhood Questionnaire. RESULTS: The 80 adolescents with ADHD scored higher on the Snacking dietary pattern compared to those without ADHD, while they did not differ on Healthy, Animal-based, Sweet, or Beverage dietary patterns. All ADHD symptom scores (Hyperactivity, Inattention and Impulsivity, and ADHD-index) correlated with increased Snacking. Impulsivity was inversely related to Sweet dietary patterns and positively to Beverage dietary patterns. CONCLUSION: The results highlight the importance of considering ADHD dimensions beyond diagnosis in understanding adolescents' dietary intake.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".