CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 58Infant Development and Preterm CareDevelopmental and Educational NeuropsychologyNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Complementary assessments of executive function in preterm and full-term preschoolers

Open access
Loe, Irene M., Chatav, Maya, Alduncin, Nidia·2015·Child Neuropsychology
DOI 10.1080/09297049.2014.906568PMC PMC4240749
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Executive functions (EFs) are interrelated cognitive processes that have been studied in relation to behavior, attention, academic achievement, and developmental disorders. Studies of EF skills assessed through parent report and performance-based measures show correlations between them ranging from none to modest. Few studies have examined the relationship between EF skills measured through parent report and performance-based measures in relation to adaptive function. The present study included preschool children born preterm as a population at high risk for EF impairments. Preschool children (N = 149) completed a battery of EF tasks that assess working memory, response inhibition, idea generation, and attention shifting or cognitive flexibility. Parents reported on children's EF and adaptive skills. Preterm children showed more parent-rated and performance-based EF impairments than did full-term children. The combined use of either parent report or performance-based measures resulted in the identification of a large number of children at risk for EF impairment, especially in the preterm group. Both parent report and performance-based EF measures were associated with children's adaptive function. EF skills are measurable in young child'ren, and we suggest that EF skills may serve as targets for intervention to improve functional outcomes. We recommend the use of both parent report and performance-based measures to characterize children's EF profiles and to customize treatment.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09297049.2014.906568

Cites

81 of 81 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

0 of 38 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    Preschoolers born preterm had higher parent-rated executive function problems than full-term peers across all BRIEF-P scores.

    “Preterm children showed more parent-rated and performance-based EF impairments than did full term children.”
    • Also stated in: § Parent-Rated EF · hedged
      “the preterm group compared to full term group had significantly higher scores, indicating more EF problems, for all BRIEF-P scores, including the GEC, indexes, and scales.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The lower mean IQ in the preterm group does not account for the observed preterm versus full-term differences in executive function.
    • Rests on an assumption: Missing data from the BRIEF-P, Vineland, and executive function battery do not bias the reported group comparisons and associations.
  • Findingown data

    A greater proportion of preterm children, 26%, than full-term children, 4%, had poor performance on three to five executive function tasks versus good performance on zero to two tasks.

    “There was a significantly greater proportion of preterm children (n = 18 or 26%) than full term children (n = 3 or 4%) with poor performance (defined as poor performance on 3-, 4-, and 5- tasks) compared to good performance (defined as poor performance on 0, 1-, and 2- tasks), X2(1) = 14.7, p < .001.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The lower mean IQ in the preterm group does not account for the observed preterm versus full-term differences in executive function.
    • Rests on an assumption: Missing data from the BRIEF-P, Vineland, and executive function battery do not bias the reported group comparisons and associations.
  • Findingown data

    The BRIEF-P GEC showed small but statistically significant correlations with the 6-boxes and verbal fluency tasks.

    “The GEC showed small, but statistically significant correlations with the 6-boxes and verbal fluency tasks.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Missing data from the BRIEF-P, Vineland, and executive function battery do not bias the reported group comparisons and associations.
  • Findingown data

    Maternal education was a significant covariate only for the 6-boxes task.

    “Maternal education was a significant covariate only for 6-boxes, F(1, 142) = 4.1, p = .046.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Missing data from the BRIEF-P, Vineland, and executive function battery do not bias the reported group comparisons and associations.
  • Findingown data

    The total variance explained in adaptive function by maternal education, performance-based executive function, and parent-rated executive function was 33.4%.

    “The total variance explained increased significantly to 33.4% with overall F(3, 129) = 21.6, p < .001, R2 = .334.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Missing data from the BRIEF-P, Vineland, and executive function battery do not bias the reported group comparisons and associations.
  • May combine two claims. 27
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 9
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    When performance-based and parent-rated executive function were entered simultaneously, they collectively explained 33.3% of variance in adaptive function in the second step, and total variance remained 33.4%.

    “with EF measures contributing a collective 33.3% to the variance in outcome in the second step, R2 change = .333, F change2, 129 = 32.3, p < .001. The total variance explained was the same as the stepwise model above – 33.4% with overall F(3, 129) = 21.6, p < .001, R2 = .334.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Missing data from the BRIEF-P, Vineland, and executive function battery do not bias the reported group comparisons and associations.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    All measures had low sensitivity and high specificity in detecting preterm group membership.

    “All measures had low sensitivity and high specificity in detecting the condition of interest (preterm group membership).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Missing data from the BRIEF-P, Vineland, and executive function battery do not bias the reported group comparisons and associations.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    BRIEF-P GEC and indexes were significantly correlated in expected directions, and BRIEF-P subscales were significantly correlated with each other, ranging from r = .48 to .84.

    “For the BRIEF-P, the GEC and BRIEF-P indexes were significantly correlated in the expected directions. BRIEF-P subscales of Inhibit, Shift, Emotional Control, Working Memory, and Plan/Organize were significantly correlated with each other, ranging from r = .48 to .84, all p < .001.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Missing data from the BRIEF-P, Vineland, and executive function battery do not bias the reported group comparisons and associations.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Using scales or tests had the highest odds ratio; children with a score 1 SD above or below the mean for either the GEC or the z-score were 26.5 times more likely to have preterm group membership.

    “Use of scales OR tests also had the highest odds ratio—children with a score 1 SD above or below the mean for either the GEC or the z-score, respectively, were 26.5 times more likely to have the condition of interest.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Missing data from the BRIEF-P, Vineland, and executive function battery do not bias the reported group comparisons and associations.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Sex, age, and maternal education were not significant predictors of failure on the second dimension of the card sort task.

    “sex (OR 1.46; 95% CI .691–3.1), age (b = −.442, SE .26, p = .08), and maternal education (b = −.438, SE .25, p = .08) were not significant.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Missing data from the BRIEF-P, Vineland, and executive function battery do not bias the reported group comparisons and associations.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In the preterm group, 22 children had poor GEC scores, 26 had poor average z-scores, and 10 had poor performance on both measures.

    “For the preterm group, 22 had poor performance on the GEC, 26 had poor performance based on average z-score, and 10 had poor performance on both measures.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Missing data from the BRIEF-P, Vineland, and executive function battery do not bias the reported group comparisons and associations.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In the full-term group, four children had poor GEC scores, two had poor average z-scores, and none had poor performance on both measures.

    “For the full term group, only 4 children had poor performance on the GEC, 2 children had poor performance based on average z-score, and none had poor performance on both.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Missing data from the BRIEF-P, Vineland, and executive function battery do not bias the reported group comparisons and associations.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    There was a trend for an age-category main effect on the 6-boxes working memory task.

    “There was a trend for main effect of age category for the working memory 6-boxes task, F(2, 142) = 2.6, p = .08.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Missing data from the BRIEF-P, Vineland, and executive function battery do not bias the reported group comparisons and associations.

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    Parent ratings of executive function contributed an additional 14.1% of the variance in adaptive function after maternal education and performance-based executive function were accounted for.

    “parent ratings of EF contributing an additional 14.1% of the variance, R2 change = .141, F change1, 129 = 27.3, p < .001.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Missing data from the BRIEF-P, Vineland, and executive function battery do not bias the reported group comparisons and associations.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Age category had significant main effects on bird/dragon, day/night, and verbal fluency performance.

    “There were significant main effects of age category for the EF tasks as follows: bird/dragon, F(2, 141) = 14.9; day/night, F(2, 140) = 10.1; and verbal fluency, F(2, 122) = 18.6, all p < .001.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Missing data from the BRIEF-P, Vineland, and executive function battery do not bias the reported group comparisons and associations.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The emergent metacognition index, made up of working memory and plan/organize subscales, correlated with three performance-based tasks, the largest number among the indexes.

    “The emergent metacognition index, comprised of working memory and plan/organize subscales, correlated with three performance-based tasks.”
    • Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
      “The correlations among scales and tests in our study showed that the emergent metacognition index, comprised of “cold” working memory and plan/organize subscales, correlated with the largest number of EF tests.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Even with the resources and service access associated with higher socioeconomic status, preterm children in the study showed executive function impairments and lower IQ than full-term children.

    “Nonetheless, even with the resources and access to services accompanying higher SES, the preterm children in our study demonstrated impairments in EF and lower IQ compared to full term children.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Preterm children performed worse than full-term children on working memory, complex response inhibition, verbal fluency, simple response inhibition, and attention/task shifting.

    “Preterm children showed poorer performance than full term children on measures of working memory, complex response inhibition, verbal fluency, simple response inhibition, and attention/task shifting.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    With a comprehensive battery of executive function tasks, the study found significant group differences on all tasks and age effects on most tasks.

    “Using a comprehensive battery of EF tasks, we found significant group differences on all tasks and age effects for most tasks.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For classifying preterm group membership, the ROC area under the curve was .717 for scales only, .754 for tests only, and .81 for a composite of scales and tests.

    “The area under the curve associated with preterm group status using scales only was .717; for tests only, .754; and for composite scales and tests, .81.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Some children had poor performance on both parent-report and direct executive function measures, while others were impaired on only one type.

    “although some children performed poorly on both measures, other children showed impaired performance on one or the other.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For detecting low adaptive function, tests alone had the highest odds ratio, and using scales or tests increased sensitivity only marginally compared with tests alone.

    “In contrast, the use of tests alone had the highest odds ratio in detecting children in the low adaptive function group, and the use of scales or tests increased the sensitivity only marginally compared to tests alone.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    On the BRIEF-P, preterm children scored higher than full-term children on every scale and index, indicating more executive function problems.

    “Using the BRIEF-P, scores on all scales and indexes were higher, indicating more EF problems, in the preterm compared to full term group.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Using both parent-rated and performance-based measures to identify poor performance found a small subset of children who were poor on both, while each measure also identified additional children who were poor on only one.

    “Using the parent-rated and performance-based measures to identify poor performance resulted in identification of a small subset of children who performed poorly on both measures, but each measure also identified additional subjects with poor performance on one or the other.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For classifying low adaptive function group membership, the ROC area under the curve was .781 for scales only, .829 for tests only, and .875 for a composite of scales and tests.

    “The area under the curve associated with low adaptive function group status using scales only was .781; for tests only, .829; and for composite scales and tests, .875.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Mean IQ scores were in the average range but significantly lower in the preterm group than in the full-term group.

    “Mean IQ scores were in the average range, but significantly lower in the preterm compared to full term group.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Executive function impairments are found in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, autism, and learning disorders.

    “EF impairments are found in several neurodevelopmental disorders, including attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism, and learning disorders (Gathercole & Alloway, 2006; Gioia, Isquith, Kenworthy et al., 2002).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Gathercole & Alloway, 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Gioia, Isquith, Kenworthy et al., 2002

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Executive function skills have been linked to brain structures and neural networks in typical and atypical development.

    “EF skills have been linked to brain structures and neural networks in several neuropsychological and neuroimaging studies of typical and atypical development (P. Anderson, 2002; Durston & Casey, 2006; Luna, Padmanabhan, & O’Hearn, 2010; Warren et al., 2013).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites P. Anderson, 2002

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Durston & Casey, 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Luna, Padmanabhan, & O’Hearn, 2010

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    Missing data were present for the BRIEF-P, Vineland, and several executive function tasks, with counts varying by group and task.

    “Data from the BRIEF-P was missing for 4 preterm children. Data from the Vineland was missing for 5 full term and 9 preterm subjects. Data were missing from the EF battery as follows: one preterm child for the bird/dragon task (would not play); one preterm and one full term for the day/night task (technical failure); 14 preterm and 6 full term for the verbal fluency task (change in testing protocol”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Developmentally sensitive, performance-based executive function measures have been specifically designed for use in preschoolers.

    “Developmentally sensitive, performance-based EF measures have been specifically designed for use in preschoolers (Carlson, 2005; Garon et al., 2008).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Carlson, 2005

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Garon et al., 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Both parent-rated and performance-based executive function measures are ecologically valid.

    “We believe that our findings suggest that both types of measures are ecologically valid, despite showing modest or limited correlations among individual EF constructs measured by parent ratings or direct observation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Executive function skills may be targets for intervention to improve outcomes.

    “Given the links between EF skills and other important functional outcomes, we suggest that EF skills may serve as targets for intervention to improve outcomes.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Studies of typical and other clinical populations using parent ratings and performance-based measures show correlations between some but not all executive function constructs, and sometimes a parent rating for one construct correlates with a performance measure of a different construct.

    “Studies of typical and other clinical populations that use parent ratings of EF and performance-based measures of EF show correlations between some, but not all EF constructs; in some cases, EF measurements correlate, but are not aligned, i.e., a parent-rating for one EF construct correlated with a performance-based measure of a different EF construct (P. Anderson, 2002; Payne, Hyman, Shores, &”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites P. Anderson, 2002

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Payne, Hyman, Shores, & North, 2011

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Toplak, Bucciarelli, Jain, & Tannock, 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Executive function has been associated with attention, behavior, academic achievement, and social function.

    “EF has been associated with other domains, including attention, behavior, academic achievement, and social function (Blair & Razza, 2007; Cameron et al., 2012; Diamantopoulou, Rydell, Thorell, & Bohlin, 2007; Ganesalingam et al., 2011).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Blair & Razza, 2007

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Cameron et al., 2012

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Diamantopoulou, Rydell, Thorell, & Bohlin, 2007

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    All children were able to perform the 3-boxes control task.

    “All children were able to perform the 3-boxes control task.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    Controls were group-matched to children born preterm for age, gender, ethnicity, and race.

    “Controls were group-matched to children born preterm for age, gender, ethnicity, and race.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Studies of preschoolers and kindergartners born preterm find impairments in working memory, inhibitory control, and planning, switching, and attention.

    “Studies of preschoolers and kindergartners born preterm find impairments in working memory (Baron, Kerns, Muller, Ahronovich, & Litman, 2012; Espy et al., 2002), inhibitory control (Baron et al., 2012; Edgin et al., 2008), and planning, switching and attention (P. J. Anderson, Doyle, & Group, 2004; Edgin et al., 2008; Woodward, Clark, Pritchard, Anderson, & Inder, 2011).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Baron, Kerns, Muller, Ahronovich, & Litman, 2012

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Espy et al., 2002

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Edgin et al., 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In typical and clinical populations, executive function skills have been shown to correlate with academic performance, behavior problems or symptoms, social skills, and overall adaptive function.

    “In typical and clinical populations, EF skills have been shown to correlate with academic performance, including reading and math (Blair & Razza, 2007; Cameron et al., 2012; Diamantopoulou et al., 2007; Jacobson et al., 2011), behavior problems/symptoms (Brocki, Eninger, Thorell, & Bohlin, 2010; Wahlstedt, Thorell, & Bohlin, 2008), social skills (Ganesalingam et al., 2011) and overall adaptive”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Blair & Razza, 2007

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Cameron et al., 2012

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Diamantopoulou et al., 2007

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Both parent report and performance-based executive function measures were associated with children's adaptive function.

    “Both parent report and performance-based EF measures were associated with children’s adaptive function.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Missing data from the BRIEF-P, Vineland, and executive function battery do not bias the reported group comparisons and associations.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The preterm brain is highly vulnerable to neonatal insults, and injuries such as periventricular hemorrhage, leukomalacia, and diffuse white matter injury likely contribute to multiple adverse outcomes.

    “The preterm brain is highly vulnerable to insults in the neonatal period, and injuries, such as periventricular hemorrhage and leukomalacia and diffuse white matter injury, likely contribute to multiple adverse outcomes (Volpe, 2001, 2009).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Volpe, 2001, 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Preschool curricula targeting multiple executive function skills improved executive function and related pre-academic skills in low socioeconomic status children.

    “Preschool curricula targeting multiple EF skills have shown improvements in EF (Bierman, Nix, Greenberg, Blair, & Domitrovich, 2008) and related pre-academic skills in low SES children (Diamond, Barnett, Thomas, & Munro, 2007).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Bierman, Nix, Greenberg, Blair, & Domitrovich, 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Diamond, Barnett, Thomas, & Munro, 2007

      Not checked in the free run.

36 of 36

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The lower mean IQ in the preterm group does not account for the observed preterm versus full-term differences in executive function.

    “Mean IQ scores were in the average range, but significantly lower in the preterm compared to full term group.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Missing data from the BRIEF-P, Vineland, and executive function battery do not bias the reported group comparisons and associations.

    “Data from the BRIEF-P was missing for 4 preterm children. Data from the Vineland was missing for 5 full term and 9 preterm subjects. Data were missing from the EF battery as follows: one preterm child for the bird/dragon task (would not play); one preterm and one full term for the day/night task (technical failure); 14 preterm and 6 full term for the verbal fluency task (change in testing protocol”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Most high-risk infant follow-up programs do not follow children past the toddler years.

    “Most high-risk infant follow-up programs do not follow children beyond the toddler years, despite adverse long-term outcomes.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Administering a standardized or research-oriented executive function battery in a general pediatric clinic is not feasible.

    “In contrast, while the administration of a standardized or research oriented EF battery in the general pediatric clinic setting is not feasible, performance-based measures remain desirable in clarifying individual EF profiles, especially when designing or customizing treatment.”
4 of 4

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?

  • Performance-based and parent-rated measures of executive function contribute divergent but related information to the measurement of executive function ability.

    “Previous research has demonstrated that performance-based and parent-rated measures of executive function contribute divergent but related information to the measurement of executive function ability [28].”

    From Sensory processing in preterm preschoolers and its association with executive function (2015) · cites this paper as [28]

  • Parent-reported executive function is associated with adaptive function in this sample.

    “We found that parent-reported executive function is associated with adaptive function; this is consistent with results of the larger study from which this sample is drawn [28].”

    From Sensory processing in preterm preschoolers and its association with executive function (2015) · cites this paper as [28]

Statistics recomputed

Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.

  • ConsistentF(2, 142) = 2.6reported p = .08 · recomputed p = .078

    “F(2, 142) = 2.6, p = .08”

  • ConsistentF(2, 142) = 0.63reported p = .53 · recomputed p = .534

    “F(2, 142) = .63, p = .53”

  • ConsistentF(2, 141) = 0.36reported p = .701 · recomputed p = .698

    “F(2, 141) = .36, p = .701”

  • ConsistentF(2, 140) = 0.234reported p = .79 · recomputed p = .792

    “F(2,140) = .234, p = .79”

  • ConsistentF(2, 122) = 0.227reported p = .797 · recomputed p = .797

    “F(2, 122) = .227, p = .797”

  • ConsistentF(1, 142) = 4.1reported p = .046 · recomputed p = .045

    “F(1, 142) = 4.1, p = .046”

  • ConsistentF(1, 141) = 1.3reported p = .27 · recomputed p = .256

    “F(1, 141) = 1.3, p = .27”

  • ConsistentF(1, 140) = 1.6reported p = .211 · recomputed p = .208

    “F(1, 140) = 1.6, p = .211”

  • ConsistentF(1, 122) = 2.4reported p = .126 · recomputed p = .124

    “F(1, 122) = 2.4, p = .126”

  • Consistentχ²(5) = 22.7reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “X2(5) = 22.7, p < .001”

  • Consistentχ²(1) = 14.7reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “X2(1) = 14.7, p < .001”

  • Consistentt(99) = 6reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “t(99) = 6.0, p < .001”

  • Consistentt(133) = 6.91reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “t(133) = 6.91, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(1, 131) = 0.073reported p = .787 · recomputed p = .787

    “F(1, 131) = .073, p = .787”

  • ConsistentF(2, 130) = 15.5reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(2, 130) = 15.5, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(3, 129) = 21.6reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(3, 129) = 21.6, p < .001”

16 of 16

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Self-check results appear here once an independent check has confirmed them.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Lezak M. D., 2004, Neuropsychological assessment
  2. Reed M. A., 1984, Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 30, 131

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Loe, I. M., Chatav, M., & Alduncin, N.
Affiliations
Stanford Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
Loe, Irene M.
ORCID
Loe, Irene M.
Venue
Child Neuropsychology
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2014-04-22
Volume
21
Issue
3
Pages
331-353
ISSN
  • 0929-7049 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-4136
DOI
10.1080/09297049.2014.906568
PMC
PMC4240749
OpenAlex
W2050064860
Semantic Scholar
b4df69df1ca1f97898603b482c6857af66c78454
Cited by
58
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2
FWCI
5.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Child Neuropsychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (K23HD071971, UL1 RR025744)
  • Society for Developmental-Behavioral Pediatrics
  • Lucile Packard Foundation for Children's Health
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Infant Development and Preterm Care
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
executive function, preterm birth, preschool children, parent report, performance-based assessment, working memory, response inhibition, idea generation, cognitive flexibility, adaptive behavior, full-term children
MeSH terms
Analysis of Variance, Attention, Developmental Disabilities, Child, Preschool, Female, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Neuropsychological Tests, Parents, Case-Control Studies, Executive Function

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-06.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-06.

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