4.7 Article

Comprehensive assessment of executive functioning following childhood severe traumatic brain injury: clinical utility of the child executive functions battery

Journal

FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY
Volume 14, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1160210

Keywords

brain injuries; child; executive functions; performance-based tests; everyday life; adolescent; assessment

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Executive functioning is severely affected following moderate-to-severe childhood TBI and should be assessed using a combination of developmentally appropriate neuropsychological tests and behavioral ratings to gain a comprehensive understanding of children's executive functions.
ObjectivesTo perform a detailed description of executive functioning following moderate-to-severe childhood traumatic brain injury (TBI), and to study demographic and severity factors influencing outcome.MethodsA convenience sample of children/adolescents aged 7-16 years, referred to a rehabilitation department after a TBI (n = 43), was compared to normative data using a newly developed neuropsychological test battery (Child Executive Functions Battery-CEF-B) and the BRIEF.ResultsPerformance in the TBI group was significantly impaired in most of the CEF-B subtests, with moderate to large effect sizes. Regarding everyday life, patients were significantly impaired in most BRIEF clinical scales, either in parent or in teacher reports. Univariate correlations in the TBI group did not yield significant correlations between the CEF-B and socio-economic status, TBI severity, age at injury, or time since injury.ConclusionExecutive functioning is severely altered following moderate-to-severe childhood TBI and is best assessed using a combination of developmentally appropriate neuropsychological tests and behavioral ratings to provide a comprehensive understanding of children's executive functions.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available