MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024093990 · doi:10.1076/chin.8.4.296.13505

The Relationship Between Parental Report on the BRIEF and Performance-Based Measures of Executive Function in Children with Moderate to Severe Traumatic Brain Injury

2002· article· en· W2024093990 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Neuropsychology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyWisconsin Card Sorting TestFluencyExecutive functionsVerbal fluency testNeuropsychologyExecutive dysfunctionNeuropsychological testClinical psychologyTest (biology)Neuropsychological assessmentTraumatic brain injuryDevelopmental psychologyCognitionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) is a questionnaire that assesses parental observations of behaviors associated with executive function in children in the home environment. The current investigation examines the relationship between the BRIEF and individually-administered neuropsychological tests in children with traumatic brain injury. Forty-eight children with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury were administered the WISC-III and several performance-based tests of executive function (the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, Trail Making Test Part B, verbal fluency), and a parent completed the BRIEF. Results indicate that the Metacognition Index from the BRIEF correlates with Verbal IQ, but none of the index scores from the BRIEF correlate with any of the performance-based tests of executive function. Results are discussed with respect to the ecological validity of standardized clinical neuropsychological tests of executive function.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.198 · 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