Cited by 114Traumatic Brain Injury ResearchCognitive Functions and MemoryDevelopmental and Educational Neuropsychology

Executive Function in the Real World: BRIEF Lessons From Mark Ylvisaker

Gioia, Gerard A., Kenworthy, Lauren, Isquith, Peter K.·2010·Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation

Abstract

It is well established that brain injuries adversely affect the executive functions and their development. Mark Ylvisaker had a substantial impact on how we assess and treat children and adolescents with disrupted executive functions secondary to traumatic brain injury. He articulated core principles for effective assessment and intervention that emphasized the importance of real-world meaning and application. He taught us that assessment that captures a child's everyday functioning in the context of real-world demands is often more informative than traditional neuropsychological measures alone and that interventions that improve functioning in the real-world environment are most useful. His pragmatic model influenced our own efforts to measure executive function and to develop intervention systems for children with executive function deficits. This article reviews the development of the Behavior Rating Inventory for Executive Function as an approach to ecological assessment of children and adolescents with traumatic brain injury. As we take what we learned from Mark Ylvisaker, it becomes increasingly apparent that our assessment and intervention methods, especially as related to the executive functions, demand an everyday, real-world context.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/htr.0b013e3181fbc272

Cites

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?

  • Previous research has highlighted a low correspondence between the scores of children and adolescents in traditional performance tests and the difficulties observed in various areas of daily life functioning, such as school or home, reported by different informants-particularly parents and/or teachers.

    “Previous research has highlighted the existence of a low correspondence between the scores of children and adolescents in traditional performance tests and the difficulties observed in various areas of daily life functioning, such as school or home, reported by different informants—particularly parents and/or teachers [44,45,46,47,48].”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 38 · Cited by 114

Authors
Gioia, G. A., Kenworthy, L., & Isquith, P. K.
Affiliations
Children's National (US)
Venue
Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation
Published
2010-11
Volume
25
Issue
6
Pages
433-439
ISSN
0885-9701 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1994039475
Cited by
114
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 9
FWCI
3.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Public Health Service (U17/ CCU323352, P30/HDO40677-07)
  • National Center for Research Resources (M01RR020359)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
Keywords
executive function, traumatic brain injury, children and adolescents, ecological assessment, real-world functioning, pragmatic model, executive function assessment, executive function interventions
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adolescent Behavior, Brain Injuries, Child, Child Behavior, Humans, Neuropsychological Tests, 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