Effects of Methylphenidate on Inhibitory Control in
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the effects of methylphenidate (MPH) on inhibitory control in hyperactive children. A double-blind, placebo-controL withinsubject (crossover) design was used in which 12 children, between 6 and 11 years of age, were each tested four times in each drug condition: 0.3 mg/kg and 1.0 mg/kg of methylphenidate, and placebo. Dependent measures included (a) the probability of inhibiting responses to a primary choice reaction time task given a stop signal on the Stopping Task, and (b) response latency and errors on the Matching Familiar Figures Test (MFFT). MPH improved the efficiency of the central inhibitory mechanism by speeding the inhibitory process, thereby affording the children greater control over their actions and enabling them to increase the probability with which they inhibited responses given a stop signal. MPH increased response latency but did not reduce errors on the MFFT, and observation of the children's task performance highlighted the interpretive problems associated with this task. Performance on both tasks was better at a dosage of 1.0 mg/kg than at 0.3 mg/kg. Manuscript received in final form January 6, 1989. This study was jointly funded by the Ontario Mental Health Foundation (Grant No. 963-86/88) and Health and Welfare Canada (NHRDP: Grant No. 6606-3166-42). We wish to thank Patricia Fulford and Haroldine Phair for their assistance in data collection, the children and parents who participated in this study, the referring physicians, and the pharmacy department at the Hospital for Sick Children for preparation of prescriptions.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".