The Effectiveness of Parent based Metacognitive Executive Functions Training on Behavioral Symptoms and Cognitive Functions of Children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Purpose: Children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) experience many problems in executive functions which later may result in numerous negative consequences in different dimensions.Therefore, this study was conducted to investigate the effectiveness of parent based metacognitive executive functions training on behavioral symptoms and cognitive functions of children with ADHD.Method: This study was quasi-experimental in the methodology with a control group pretest-posttest design.The population included all the 1 st to 3 rd grade primary school students aged 7 to 10 in Tehran in the academic year 2018-2019.Among them, 40 students together with their mothers were selected by purposive sampling and then randomly divided into the two groups, the experimental and the control group.Mothers of the experimental group received twelve 2-hour sessions of metacognitive executive functions training whereas the mothers in control group (n=20) were placed in the waiting list.SNAP-IV Rating Scale (Swanson, Nolan and Pelham, 1983) and CNS Vital Signs Neurocognitive Assessment (Gualtieri & Johnson, 2006) were used to gather the data.Then, data were analyzed by Multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA).Results: Results showed that metacognitive executive functions training was significantly effective in decreasing the behavioral symptoms (F=24.782)and increasing the cognitive functions (working memory: F=32.130 and cognitive flexibility: F=6.053) of children with ADHD.Conclusion: By using game based activities structurally managed by the parents, this therapeutic method targets dimension of executive functions which are important in the management of cognition and behavior; hence it can improve the cognitive and behavioral symptoms in 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".