Adolescents with solid organ transplant: Using the BRIEF2 parent-report and self-report to measure parent-child agreement and everyday executive function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Agreement between parent and adolescent ratings of executive function (EF) is not known in adolescents with solid organ transplant (SOT), even though pressing concerns about EF deficits are being raised in this population. The current study investigated EF in adolescents with SOT using parent and self report. Twenty-five adolescents (M = 15.51 years) with SOT and their parent completed a behavior rating scale assessing EF within everyday context using the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function, Second Edition (BRIEF2). Parents and their adolescents demonstrated moderate to excellent agreement across the BRIEF2 clinical and index scores, higher than previous research with a typical sample. Adolescent males had higher agreement with their parents than female adolescents. Both parents and adolescents reported significantly higher mean T scores on various BRIEF2 indices and domains, in addition to higher rates of clinically elevated executive dysfunction than their peers. Assessment of EF and targeting specific EF domains for intervention may be useful in this population.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".