4.6 Article

Parental Assessments of Internalizing and Externalizing Behavior and Executive Function in Children with Primary Hypertension

Journal

JOURNAL OF PEDIATRICS
Volume 154, Issue 2, Pages 207-212

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2008.08.017

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [5K23HL080068-04, K23 HL080068, K23 HL080068-05] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NINDS NIH HHS [K23 NS058756] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective To determine the relations between hypertension and parental ratings of behavior and executive functions in children with primary hypertension and to examine the potential moderating influence of obesity. Study design Hypertensive and normotensive control groups were matched for age, sex, race, intelligence quotient, maternal education, household income, and obesity. Parents completed the Child Behavior Checklist to assess Internalizing and Externalizing problems and the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function to assess behavioral correlates of executive function. Results Thirty-two hypertensive subjects and 32 normotensive con trol sujects (aged 10 to 18 years) were enrolled. On the Child Behavior Checklist, hypertensives had higher Internalizing T-scores (53 vs 44.5, P = .02) with 37% failing within the clinically significant range vs 6% of control sujects (P = .005). Internalizing score increased with increasing body mass index percentile in hypertensive but not normotensive subjects. Hypertensives had worse Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function Global Executive Composite T-scores compared with control subjects, (50 vs 43, P = .009). Conclusions Children with both hypertension and obesity demonstrate higher rates of clinically significant internalizing problems, and hypertensives (irrespective of obesity) demonstrate lower parental ratings of executive function compared with normotensive control subjects. (J Pediatr 2009,154:207-12)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available