Investigating the BRIEF and BRIEF-SR in Adolescents with Mild Traumatic Brain Injury

Simulator Driving Abilities, Executive Functions, and Adaptive Behavior Among Adolescents With Complex Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

OBJECTIVE

To examines the driving skills, executive functions, and adaptive behavior of adolescents diagnosed with Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) combined with emotional difficulties and/or learning disabilities (complex ADHD), compared to adolescents without ADHD.

METHOD

A cross-sectional study including 30 adolescents with complex ADHD and 33 adolescents without ADHD aged 15 to 18 years. Driving skills on a simulator, executive functions, and adaptive behavior were evaluated.

RESULTS

Adolescents without ADHD demonstrated significantly higher total scores on the driving simulator, indicating better driving performance compared to adolescents with complex ADHD. In the complex ADHD group, after controlling for different Conners Comprehensive Behavior Rating Scale-Self Report scales, driving simulator scores were partially correlated with executive functions.

CONCLUSION

These findings emphasize the unique needs of adolescents with complex ADHD. Given the significance of driving in today's society, it is crucial to consider the development of intervention programs to support this population's driving skills.

Turkish Adaptation of the Executive Functions and Occupational Routines Scale: Validity and Reliability Among Children with Dyslexia

The purpose of the present study was to provide a Turkish cultural adaptation (EFORTS-T) of the Executive Functions and Occupational Routines Scale (EFORTS) and to investigate its psychometric quality in children with dyslexia. We culturally adapted the original English version of this instrument with internationally suggested methods. Participants included the mothers of either randomly selected children with dyslexia (study group, n = 158) or age and sex-matched typically developing children (control group, n = 167). These participants completed a demographic form, the EFORTS-T, and the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Parent form (BRIEF-P). For internal consistency, the alpha coefficient of the new instrument was excellent (.93), and it showed satisfactory test-retest reliability over a 14-day interval (.91). The criterion-related validity between the EFORTS-T and the BRIEF-P was moderate (.73). Fit indices of the model supported its factor structure. In conclusion, our findings support the validity and reliability of the new Turkish version of EFORTS for evaluating EF and contributing to the daily occupational routines of children with dyslexia for Turkish respondents. Further studies are needed to apply this instrument to children of different age groups and psychiatric conditions.

Confirmatory factor analysis of the BRIEF2 in a sample of youth with Down syndrome

BACKGROUND

The factor structure of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function, second edition (BRIEF2) has been widely examined in both typically developing children and specific clinical samples. Despite the frequent use of the BRIEF2 for measuring executive functioning in individuals with Down syndrome, no study has investigated the factorial validity or dimensionality of the BRIEF2 in this population. This study aimed to address this notable gap in the literature.

METHODS

Parents of 407 children and youth with Down syndrome aged 6-18 years completed the BRIEF2 as part of different studies led by six sites. Three competing models proposed by previous studies were analysed using Confirmatory Factor Analysis: the theoretical structure of the BRIEF2 where the scales were constrained to load on three factors labelled as Cognitive, Behavioral, and Emotional Regulation, a two-factor correlated model with the merged Behavioral and Emotional regulation, and a single-factor model.

RESULTS

The three-factor model provided a better fit than the one- and two-factor models, yet a large correlation was observed between Behavioural and Emotional regulation factors. The results provide meaningful explanatory value for the theoretical structure of the BRIEF2. However, the Behavioral and Emotional regulation factors might be less differentiated and the two-factor structure of the BRIEF2 may also make theoretical and empirical sense.

CONCLUSIONS

Although more studies are needed to further examine the factor structure of the BRIEF2 in youth with Down syndrome, this investigation provides preliminary support for the interpretation of the three executive function index scores provided by the BRIEF2: Cognitive, Behavioral, and Emotional Regulation.

The dimensionality of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function, Second Edition in a clinical sample

The parent-report Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function, Second Edition (BRIEF-2) is a widely used pediatric neuropsychological measure. Unfortunately, despite meaningful changes from its predecessor, few studies have examined its internal factor structure (now with Behavioral Regulation [BRI], Emotion Regulation [ERI], and Cognitive Regulation [CRI]), and no available literature has investigated higher order models for the BRIEF-2. This study sought to address this shortcoming in the literature by investigating and reporting on the dimensionality of the parent-report BRIEF-2 in a clinical sample. Two hundred and two (202) pediatric neuropsychology examinees (M age = 9.90; 68% males) with complete data for the parent-report BRIEF-2 were included. Descriptive results revealed generally elevated scores across BRIEF-2 scales (Global Executive Composite M T = 70.16). Exploratory factor analyses suggested two factors (CRI and BRI/ERI) should be extracted, and that higher order models should be considered. Confirmatory factor analyses suggested that a direct hierarchical/bifactor two-factor structure (which was more parsimonious than the theoretical three-factor model) provided the best fit, with a bulk of the variance explained by the general GEC factor. The BRIEF-2 may be best interpreted at the overall level, with relatively less weight given to the index variables, particularly within clinical samples with high levels of reported executive functioning difficulties. Implications of these findings, limitations of the present study, and appropriate directions for future inquiry were discussed.