Discriminant validity of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function Parent Form for children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder, with concomitant executive function deficits often being the focus of empirical and clinical investigation. This study explored the validity of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function Parent Form (BRIEF; Gioia, Isquith, Guy, & Kenworthy, 2000) for children with ADHD and a matched control sample. Fifty-eight children with ADHD (69% with comorbidity) and 58 matched controls were found to exhibit statistically (p .001) and clinically significant group differences on the BRIEF scales. Discriminant function analyses revealed that the Behavior Regulation and Metacognition Indexes accurately classified 82% of the sample (86% of controls and 79% of children with ADHD correctly identified). The Behavior Regulation Index was found to make the most significant contribution overall to the discriminant function, consistent with arguments that response inhibition is the primary deficit in ADHD. Implications and future research are discussed.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it