Repository logo
 

A Systematic Review of the Validity and Reliability of Assessment Tools for Executive Function and Adaptive Function Following Brain Pathology among Children and Adolescents in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

Published version
Peer-reviewed

Change log

Authors

Kusi-Mensah, Kwabena  ORCID logo  https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0165-8405
Nuamah, Nana Dansoah  ORCID logo  https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4554-5517

Abstract

Minimal but increasing number of assessment instruments for Executive functions (EFs) and adaptive functioning (AF) have either been developed for or adapted and validated for use among children in low and middle income countries (LAMICs). However, the suitability of these tools for this context is unclear. A systematic review of such instruments was thus undertaken. The Systematic review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) checklist (Liberati et al., in BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.), 339, 2009). A search was made for primary research papers reporting psychometric properties for development or adaptation of either EF or AF tools among children in LAMICs, with no date or language restrictions. 14 bibliographic databases were searched, including grey literature. Risk of bias assessment was done following the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments) guidelines (Mokkink et al., in Quality of Life Research, 63, 32, 2014). For EF, the Behaviour Rating Inventory of Executive Functioning (BRIEF- multiple versions), Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST), Go/No-go and the Rey-Osterrieth complex figure (ROCF) were the most rigorously validated. For AFs, the Vineland Adaptive Behaviour Scales (VABS- multiple versions) and the Child Function Impairment Rating Scale (CFIRS- first edition) were most validated. Most of these tools showed adequate internal consistency and structural validity. However, none of these tools showed acceptable quality of evidence for sufficient psychometric properties across all the measured domains, particularly so for content validity and cross-cultural validity in LAMICs. There is a great need for adequate adaptation of the most popular EF and AF instruments, or alternatively the development of purpose-made instruments for assessing children in LAMICs.Systematic Review Registration numbers: CRD42020202190 (EF tools systematic review) and CRD42020203968 (AF tools systematic review) registered on PROSPERO website ( https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ ).

Description

Journal Title

Neuropsychol Rev

Conference Name

Journal ISSN

1040-7308
1573-6660

Volume Title

32

Publisher

Springer Nature

Rights and licensing

Except where otherwised noted, this item's license is described as http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Sponsorship
Commonwealth Scholarship Commission (GHCS-2019-169)