The association between inattentive and hyperactive/ impulsive symptoms and deficits in inhibitory control in kindergarten children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In children, the key symptoms of Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), inattention (I) and hyperactivity/impulsivity (H/I), are associated with deficits in executive function of behavioural inhibition in clinical populations, when performance-based measures of inhibition are used.This study examined whether I and H/I symptoms independently and collectively predict behavioural inhibition in a non-clinical sample of kindergarten students (n = 20).ADHD symptoms and behavioural inhibition deficits were measured using teacher ratings on the Conners Teacher Rating Scale and the BRIEF.I and H/I symptoms were independently linearly associated with inhibition deficits (r of I = .881,r of H/I = .599);when included together in the same model, H/I symptoms alone were sufficient to significantly predict inhibition regulation (R 2 = .881).These results suggest that behavioural inhibition deficits may be underlying symptoms of the Hyperactive/Impulsive subtype of ADHD, but not the Inattentive subtype.Table of Contents ...............
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".