Assessing Children's Executive Function: BADS-C Validity.

assessment child development cognitive function ecological validity executive function

Journal

Frontiers in psychology

ISSN: 1664-1078

Titre abrégé: Front Psychol

Pays: Switzerland

ID NLM: 101550902

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2021

Historique:

received: 05 11 2020

accepted: 11 01 2021

entrez: 8 3 2021

pubmed: 9 3 2021

medline: 9 3 2021

Statut: epublish

Résumé

To investigate the external and ecological validity of a standardized test of children's executive functioning (EF), the Behavioral Assessment of the Dysexecutive Syndrome for Children (BADS-C). There are few standardized measures for assessing executive functions in children, and the evidence for the validity of most measures is currently limited. A normative sample of 256 children and adolescents from age 8-16 years completed the BADS-C, and a parent or teacher completed rating scales of the child's everyday problems related to EF (Children's version of the Dysexecutive Questionnaire; DEX-C) and Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ), a commonly used measure of emotional, social, cognitive, and behavioral problems. Exploratory factor analyses yielded a two-factor structure to the BADS-C, indicative of monitoring and abstract reasoning processes, and a three-factor structure to the DEX-C, reflecting behavioral, and cognitive components of the dysexecutive syndrome as well as emotional responsiveness. Regression analyses showed significant relationships between BADS-C scores and everyday functioning as reported on the DEX and SDQ. Furthermore, there were significant differences in BADS-C scores between those children in the upper and lower quartiles on the SDQ. Results provide tentative evidence of BADS-C and DEX-C construct, convergent and predictive validity.

Sections du résumé

OBJECTIVES OBJECTIVE

To investigate the external and ecological validity of a standardized test of children's executive functioning (EF), the Behavioral Assessment of the Dysexecutive Syndrome for Children (BADS-C).

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND

There are few standardized measures for assessing executive functions in children, and the evidence for the validity of most measures is currently limited.

METHOD METHODS

A normative sample of 256 children and adolescents from age 8-16 years completed the BADS-C, and a parent or teacher completed rating scales of the child's everyday problems related to EF (Children's version of the Dysexecutive Questionnaire; DEX-C) and Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ), a commonly used measure of emotional, social, cognitive, and behavioral problems.

RESULTS RESULTS

Exploratory factor analyses yielded a two-factor structure to the BADS-C, indicative of monitoring and abstract reasoning processes, and a three-factor structure to the DEX-C, reflecting behavioral, and cognitive components of the dysexecutive syndrome as well as emotional responsiveness. Regression analyses showed significant relationships between BADS-C scores and everyday functioning as reported on the DEX and SDQ. Furthermore, there were significant differences in BADS-C scores between those children in the upper and lower quartiles on the SDQ.

CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS

Results provide tentative evidence of BADS-C and DEX-C construct, convergent and predictive validity.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.626291 PMID: 33679544 PMC: PMC7934621

pubmed: 33679544

doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.626291

pmc: PMC7934621

doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

626291

Informations de copyright

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Références

J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2015;37(9):956-71

pubmed: 26332175

Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2018 Mar;27(1):

pubmed: 29024371

J Child Neurol. 2017 Mar;32(4):387-396

pubmed: 28193119

J Consult Clin Psychol. 2004 Oct;72(5):757-66

pubmed: 15482034

J Intellect Disabil Res. 2010 Apr;54(4):308-19

pubmed: 20202074

Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2009 Oct;19(5):662-76

pubmed: 19169936

J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2006 Mar;12(2):194-209

pubmed: 16573854

J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 1998 Nov;4(6):547-58

pubmed: 10050359

Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1996 Oct 29;351(1346):1405-11; discussion 1411-2

pubmed: 8941952

Psychol Bull. 1997 Jan;121(1):65-94

pubmed: 9000892

Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2006 Jan;59(1):2-27

pubmed: 16556554

J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2006 Mar;12(2):261-71

pubmed: 16573859

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998 Nov 24;95(24):14529-34

pubmed: 9826734

J Intellect Disabil Res. 2010 Apr;54(4):366-79

pubmed: 20433573

Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev. 2010 Sep;13(3):254-74

pubmed: 20589428

Brain Cogn. 2009 Dec;71(3):362-8

pubmed: 19628325

Brain Inj. 2002 Sep;16(9):759-72

pubmed: 12217202

Psychol Bull. 1984 Jan;95(1):3-28

pubmed: 6544432

Cognition. 2001 Apr;79(1-2):1-37

pubmed: 11164022

J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2004 Sep;45(6):1042-53

pubmed: 15257661

Annu Rev Psychol. 2013;64:135-68

pubmed: 23020641

Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2016 Aug;26(4):558-83

pubmed: 26272265

Brain Inj. 2011;25(9):870-81

pubmed: 21631188

Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1982 Jun 25;298(1089):211-26

pubmed: 6125972

Biol Psychiatry. 2005 Jun 1;57(11):1336-46

pubmed: 15950006

Front Psychol. 2019 Mar 01;10:311

pubmed: 30881324

Dev Med Child Neurol. 2007 Jun;49(6):412-6

pubmed: 17518924

Brain Cogn. 1988 Apr;7(2):212-30

pubmed: 3377900

Trends Cogn Sci. 2004 Jan;8(1):26-32

pubmed: 14697400

Neuropsychol Rev. 2006 Mar;16(1):17-42

pubmed: 16794878

Trends Neurosci. 2000 Oct;23(10):475-83

pubmed: 11006464

J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 1997 Jul;38(5):581-6

pubmed: 9255702

Nature. 1995 Nov 16;378(6554):279-81

pubmed: 7477346

J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2000 Aug;15(4):973-88

pubmed: 10876170