The clinical utility of the behavior rating inventory of executive function in preschool children with a history of perinatal stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study examined the utility of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Preschool Version (BRIEF-P) in capturing emerging deficits in executive function in preschool children with a history of perinatal stroke. Parents and teachers of 55 clinically referred preschool children (3–5 years of age) provided ratings using the BRIEF-P. Both parent (M = 56.02, p = .001) and teacher ratings (M = 58.61, p = .002) indicated significant scale elevations for working memory compared to the normative sample, albeit below the clinically elevated range. Parent and teacher ratings were low-to-moderately correlated (r = .05–.55). Greater deficits in working memory (r = −.58), inhibition (r = −.45), and planning/organization (r = −.51), as rated by teachers, were associated with lower intellectual functioning. Parents’ ratings were not associated with intellectual functioning. Further, no neurological or personal characteristics were associated with ratings of executive function. The current study demonstrates children with a history of perinatal stroke are, on average, following a normal trajectory of executive function development according to BRIEF-P ratings. The needs for multi-informant ratings and performance-based measures to comprehensively assess executive functioning in preschoolers with a history of stroke are discussed.
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 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".