Cited by 113Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderDevelopmental and Educational NeuropsychologyBehavioral and Psychological Studies

Efficacy of cognitive training interventions in hyperactive children: A critical review

Abikoff, Howard·1985·Clinical Psychology Review

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0272-7358(85)90005-4

Cites

80 of 80 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Abikoff, H.
Affiliations
Long Island Jewish Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Abikoff, Howard
Venue
Clinical Psychology Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1985
Volume
5
Issue
5
Pages
479-512
ISSN
0272-7358 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1974790385
Cited by
113
References
76
Citations by year
2022: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 1
FWCI
4.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
erratum (1986-01-01)
Open access
closed
Locations
Clinical Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
Keywords
cognitive training, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, hyperactive children, self-regulation, transfer effects, generalization, maintenance effects, medication, academic performance, behavioral functioning, individual differences, problem-solving assessment, treatment efficacy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review