ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2025
A mathematical framework for modelling the dynamic nature of ADHD symptoms.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Attention-Deficit/Hyperctivity Disorder (ADHD) is characterized by core symptoms of inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity that fluctuate dynamically based on context. Standard diagnostic criteria provide static descriptions, failing to capture this variability, while existing computational models may lack interpretability or flexibility for clinical application. There is a need for dynamic, theory-driven models to represent ADHD. Objective: This study aimed to develop and present a set of interpretable mathematical models representing the dynamic, context-dependent nature of the core symptoms of ADHD, grounded in established neuropsychological principles. Methods: Algebraic equations were formulated to represent symptom dynamics. Inattention was modelled using modulated exponential decay functions. Hyperactivity was represented by a modulated sinusoidal function reflecting its oscillatory pattern. Impulsive choice was modelled using hyperbolic delay discounting combined with a probabilistic softmax choice rule. Results: The study produced specific mathematical equations that quantify the temporal dynamics and contextual modulation for each core symptom domain. These equations provide a formal representation of how attention decays, hyperactivity fluctuates, and impulsive choices are made, incorporating individual sensitivities and situational factors pertinent to ADHD. Conclusion: The proposed mathematical models offer a novel, quantitative framework for understanding and representing the dynamic nature of ADHD symptoms. Grounded in neuropsychological theory, these interpretable models provide a potential advance over static descriptions and may facilitate improved clinical assessment, personalized treatment strategies, and targeted research into the mechanisms underlying ADHD. Further empirical validation is warranted to establish their clinical utility. Further empirical validation is warranted to establish their clinical utility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.