MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414181144 · doi:10.1192/j.eurpsy.2025.225

How to manage non-response using stimulants?

2025· article· en· W4414181144 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandra Philipsen

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral and Psychological Studies
Canadian institutionsPrivy Council Office
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)Working hoursSide effect (computer science)MEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Introduction/background Psychiatrist working with ADHD-patients since 2007. Method I have diagnosed and treated more than a 1000 patients with ADHD. I have always, when it has been possible, given one medication at a time to be able to evaluate how it works, and what gives side effects. Results When stimulants suddenly don’t work anymore, I have searched for physical and psychological problems that could explain it. By solving these problems, the stimulants work again. Conclusion By working this way, we have noticed that patients have a high compliance, and there are a lot less cases of relapse with ADHD symptoms. Disclosure of Interest None Declared

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.553
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean PsychiatrySame topicBehavioral and Psychological StudiesFrench-language works237,207