Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38645570›Full record

ArticleScandinavian journal of child and adolescent psychiatry and psychology2024

Executive functioning in children with ADHD Investigating the cross-method correlations between performance tests and rating scales.

Kristoffer Dalsgaard Olsen, Denis Sukhodolsky, Aida Bikic

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scandinavian journal of child and adolescent psychiatry and psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Kristoffer Dalsgaard OlsenChild and Youth Psychiatric outpatient clinic, Region of Southern Denmark, Aabenraa, Denmark.
Denis SukhodolskyChild Study Centre, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, United States.
Aida BikicInstitute of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Replicated evidence shows a weak or non-significant correlation between different methods of evaluating executive functions (EF). The current study investigates the association between rating scales and cognitive tests of EF in a sample of children with ADHD and executive dysfunction. Method: The sample included 139 children (aged 6-13) diagnosed with ADHD and executive dysfunctions. The children completed subtests of the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB). Parents completed the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) and the Children's Organizational Skills Scale (COSS). Analysis: Pairwise Spearman correlations were calculated between the composite and separate subscales of cognitive tests and rating scales. In secondary analyses, pairwise Spearman correlations were conducted between all composite scales and subscales, stratified by child sex and child ADHD subtype. Results: The correlation analyses between composite scores yielded no significant correlations. The results when comparing CANTAB TO and BRIEF GE are r=-.095, p=.289, and r=.042, p=.643 when comparing CANTAB TO and COSS TO. The analyses between all composite scales and subscales found one significant negative correlation (r=-.25, p<.01). There are significant cross-method differences when stratified by the ADHD-Inattentive subtype, showing significant negative correlations (moderate) between CANTAB and BRIEF composite (r=-.355, p=.014) and subscales. Discussion: It is possible that the different methods measure different underlying constructs of EF. It may be relevant to consider the effects of responder bias and differences in ecological validity in both measurement methods. Conclusion: The results found no significant correlations. The expectation in research and clinical settings should not be to find the same results when comparing data from cognitive tests and rating scales. Future research might explore novel approaches to EF testing with a higher level of ecological validity, and designing EF rating scales that capture EF behaviors more so than EF cognition.

Indexed as

ADHDbehaviorBRIEFCANTABcognitioncognitive testCOSScross-methodologicalecological validityexecutive functionsperformance testrating scale

Identifiers

PMID38645570
PMCPMC11027034

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.