Transgender Identity and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Symptoms: Findings From the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine associations between identifying as transgender and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms in US early adolescents. METHODS: We analyzed cross-sectional data from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study (Year 3, 2019-2021) to estimate associations between gender identity and ADHD symptoms using the Child Behavior Checklist Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-oriented attention problem scale scores, adjusting for age, sex, ethnicity, parent education, household income, and study site. Additional models adjusted for stress problems and depression symptoms. Multiple linear regression analyses estimated the association between gender identity and ADHD symptoms. RESULTS: In a sample of 10,277 adolescents, mostly 12-13-year-olds, 1.0% self-identified as transgender and 1.1% self-identified as gender-questioning. Self-reported transgender status (B = 3.41; 95% confidence interval = 0.79-6.04; p = .011) and gender-questioning status (B = 2.72; 95% confidence interval = 0.79-4.65; p = .006) were both associated with higher ADHD symptom scores when compared to cisgender peers after adjusting for sociodemographic variables. In models adjusting for stress problems and depression as well as sociodemographic variables, the associations between transgender and gender-questioning status and ADHD symptoms were attenuated and no longer statistically significant. DISCUSSION: Our results indicate that gender minority status may be linked to higher ADHD symptom scores, potentially due to higher minority stress.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".