ArticleJAACAP open2026
The Longitudinal Relationship Between Self-Reported Executive Function and Mental Health in Early Adolescence.
Article in JAACAP open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: Psychological theories emphasize the role of executive function in the mental health of adolescents. Yet, the longitudinal relationship remains poorly understood. This cohort study explored the longitudinal relationship between self-reported executive function and adolescents' mental health and potential gender differences. Method: Data were collected at 3 time points from 8,072 adolescents (11-15 years old) in 84 secondary schools in the United Kingdom, as part of the MYRIAD (MY Resilience In ADolescence) trial (ISRCTN86619085). The longitudinal relationship between adolescents' self-reported executive function (Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function, Second Edition [BRIEF-2]) and 4 mental health outcomes-well-being (Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale [WEMWBS]), social-emotional-behavioral difficulties (Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire [SDQ]), risk for depression (Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale [CES-D]), and suicidality (item-based)-was explored using 3 mixed-effects regression models. Model 1 included a composite measure of executive function; model 2 included behavioral, cognitive, and emotional self-regulation; and model 3 included 7 executive function skills. Results: Better executive function (ie, lower BRIEF-2 scores) was associated with better mental health over 1 year (regression coefficient [95% CI]: well-being -0.23 [-0.24, -0.22], social-emotional-behavioral difficulties 0.24 [0.23, 0.24], risk for depression 0.33 [0.32, 0.34], and suicidality 0.02 [0.01, 0.02]). This association weakened over time for all outcomes except suicidality (model 1). Associations were strongest for emotional self-regulation (model 2) and specifically emotional control and planning (model 3). The relative role of other executive function skills (eg, working memory and self-monitoring) differed by outcome and gender. Conclusion: Better executive function was associated with better mental health over time. Potential intervention targets include emotional self-regulation, particularly emotional control and planning.
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.