Are Parent- and Teacher-Reported Executive Function Difficulties Associated With Parenting Stress for Children Diagnosed With ADHD?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To examine the relationship between parenting stress and parent- and teacher-reported executive function difficulties (EFDs) for childhood ADHD. Method: A secondary analysis using linear regression was conducted on parent- and teacher-completed Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function and Parenting Stress Indexes for 5- to 12-year-olds ( n = 243) with ADHD. Results: The linear combination of teacher- and parent-reported EFDs accounted for 49% of the variance in child-related parenting stress. Teacher-reported school-based EFDs were relatively inconsequential, having accounted for only 3% of this variance. This stress is best explained by EFDs with emotional control in the school environment and parent-reported EFDs with emotional control, inhibit, monitor, and shift. Conclusion: Parent-reported EFDs, and less so school-based EFDs, are related to parenting stress, but only in regard to EFDs likely underpinning behavioral outbursts and those likely underpinning the daily hassles of providing specialized care to children with ADHD.
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".