Cited by 39Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderDevelopmental and Educational NeuropsychologyHistorical and Modern Theater Studies

Validating the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Functioning for Children With ADHD and Their Typically Developing Peers

Davidson, Fiona, Cherry, Kathlyn, Corkum, Penny·2016·Applied Neuropsychology: Child

Abstract

The Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Functioning (BRIEF) has been widely used both clinically and in research for measuring executive functioning (EF) in children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This study examined the concurrent validity of the BRIEF (both parent and teacher ratings) compared to performance-based measures of EF in children with ADHD compared to typically developing (TD) children. The authors assessed 20 children with ADHD and 20 TD controls on 4 EF domains-working memory, planning, inhibition, and set shifting-using the BRIEF and performance-based measures of EF. Children (aged 8-12 years old) with ADHD demonstrated more EF impairment than their TD peers on both questionnaire- and performance-based measures. Ratings on questionnaire- and performance-based measures did not uniquely correlate with each other. Questionnaire-based measures were better at discriminating between children with ADHD and TD children, specifically BRIEF parent ratings, and discrimination depended mostly on the Working Memory, Plan/Organize, and Inhibit subscales. The BRIEF has clinical utility for discriminating between children with ADHD and their TD peers; however, some limitations exist for interpretation of the BRIEF, and it should be used with caution in the assessment and diagnosis of ADHD.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/21622965.2015.1021957

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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
Davidson, F., Cherry, K., & Corkum, P.
Affiliations
Dalhousie University (CA)
Corresponding author
Corkum, Penny
Venue
Applied Neuropsychology: Child
Published
2015-06-25
Volume
5
Issue
2
Pages
127-137
ISSN
  • 2162-2965 (ISSN-L)
  • 2162-2973
OpenAlex
W2331108130
Cited by
39
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1
FWCI
2.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Applied Neuropsychology Child (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
This work was supported by the IWK Health Centre Category A Award under Grant No. 1010015.
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 › Clinical Psychology › Historical and Modern Theater Studies
Keywords
executive function, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, concurrent validity, performance-based measures, working memory, planning, inhibition, set-shifting, parent ratings, teacher ratings, typically developing children, ADHD diagnosis
MeSH terms
Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Child, Child Behavior, Female, Humans, Inhibition, Psychological, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Neuropsychological Tests, Parents, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Surveys and Questionnaires, 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.

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