ArticleChild neuropsychology : a journal on normal and abnormal development in childhood and adolescence2019
Item response theory analyses of the Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System card sorting subtest.
Article in Child neuropsychology : a journal on normal and abnormal development in childhood and adolescence, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recent Advances in Neuropsychological Test Interpretation for Clinical Practice.Neuropsychology review · 2024Review
- Executive functions and components of oral reading fluency through the lens of text complexity.Reading and writing · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In the current study, we examined the dimensionality of the 16-item Card Sorting subtest of the Delis-Kaplan Executive Functioning System assessment in a sample of 264 native English-speaking children between the ages of 9 and 15 years. We also tested for measurement invariance for these items across age and gender groups using item response theory (IRT). Results of the exploratory factor analysis indicated that a two-factor model that distinguished between verbal and perceptual items provided the best fit to the data. Although the items demonstrated measurement invariance across age groups, measurement invariance was violated for gender groups, with two items demonstrating differential item functioning for males and females. Multigroup analysis using all 16 items indicated that the items were more effective for individuals whose IRT scale scores were relatively high. A single-group explanatory IRT model using 14 non-differential item functioning items showed that for perceptual ability, females scored higher than males and that scores increased with age for both males and females; for verbal ability, the observed increase in scores across age differed for males and females. The implications of these findings are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.