Adaptive functioning following pediatric traumatic brain injury: Relationship to executive function and processing speed.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Pediatric traumatic brain injury (TBI) may affect children's ability to perform everyday tasks (i.e., adaptive functioning). Guided by the American Association for Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (AAIDD) model, we explored the association between TBI and adaptive functioning at increasing levels of specificity (global, AAIDD domains, and subscales). We also examined the contributions of executive function and processing speed as mediators of TBI's effects on adaptive functioning. METHOD: Children (ages 8-13) with severe TBI (STBI; n = 19), mild-moderate TBI (MTBI; n = 50), or orthopedic injury (OI; n = 60) completed measures of executive function (TEA-Ch) and processing speed (WISC-IV) an average of 2.7 years postinjury (SD = 1.2; range: 1-5.3). Parents rated children's adaptive functioning (ABAS-II, BASC-2, CASP). RESULTS: STBI had lower global adaptive functioning (η2 = .04-.08) than the MTBI and OI groups, which typically did not differ. Deficits in the STBI group were particularly evident in the social domain, with specific deficits in social participation, leisure, and social adjustment (η2 = .06-.09). Jointly, executive function and processing speed were mediators of STBI's effects on global adaptive functioning and in conceptual and social domains. In the STBI group, executive function mediated social functioning, and processing speed mediated social participation. CONCLUSIONS: Children with STBI experience deficits in adaptive functioning, particularly in social adjustment, with less pronounced deficits in conceptual and practical skills. Executive function and processing speed may mediate the effects of STBI on adaptive functioning. Targeting adaptive functioning and associated cognitive deficits for intervention may enhance quality of life for pediatric TBI survivors. (PsycINFO Database Record
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".