MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417123504 · doi:10.3390/bs15121698

A Qualitative Study of the Lived Experience of Children with ADHD

2025· article· en· W4417123504 on OpenAlexafffund
Daphne S. Ling, Adele Diamond

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchInstitute of Mental Health, University of British ColumbiaVancouver Coastal Health Research InstituteCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of Canada
KeywordsQualitative researchPerspective (graphical)Lived experiencePerceptionThematic analysisOddsAttention deficit hyperactivity disorder

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a common neurodevelopmental disorder. While there have been many empirical studies of childhood ADHD, there have been few qualitative studies investigating first-hand accounts of the lived experiences of children with ADHD. This study addresses that gap with qualitative data from open-ended interviews with 12 children ages 8 to 14 years about the positive and negative aspects of their ADHD. Overarching themes were identified using Interpretive Description and Thematic Analysis. An important point to emerge was a discrepancy between the generally negative perception of ADHD by society and the medical profession (a psychiatric disorder that needs to be cured) and the more nuanced perceptions of children who themselves have ADHD, where they express positive as well as negative aspects. Positive aspects reported included having more energy, the ability to hyper-focus, and being more creative and more fun because of their ADHD. The children's nuanced view of their ADHD is also at odds with an exclusively asset-based neurodiversity perspective that focuses only on strengths. The children perceived that some aspects of their ADHD are not advantageous. Implications are discussed with reference to rethinking how we understand ADHD, treatment practices for ADHD, and how to involve children with ADHD in future research.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.316
Threshold uncertainty score0.233

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.184
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.307 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavioral SciencesSame topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderFrench-language works237,207