This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent repository link:http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/5124/ Link to published version: http://dx.doi.org/10. 1080/87565641.2014.997933 Copyright and reuse: City Research Online aims to make research outputs of City, University of London available to a wider audience. Copyright and Moral Rights remain with the author(s) and/or copyright holders. URLs from City Research Online may be freely distributed and linked to. AbstractThe current study assessed a comprehensive range of executive functions (EFs) in children with poor motor skills, comparing profiles of children with a diagnosis of developmental coordination disorder (DCD) and those identified with motor difficulties (MD). Children in both groups performed more poorly than typically-developing controls on (Geuze, 2005). The DLPFC is also closely linked to the cerebellum, a central structure in motor control, suggesting that motor impairments could have concomitant effects on cognitive functioning (Diamond, 2000). This relationship between motor and cognitive functioning is the focus of the present study.One area of cognitive functioning that may be affected in DCD, with particular implications for academic achievement, is that of 'executive functioning' (EF; Best, Miller, & Naglieri, 2011;St Clair-Thompson & Gathercole, 2006). This term covers a range of highlevel abilities, including planning, switching between tasks, inhibiting responses and storing information in memory while processing another task (Henry & Bettenay, 2010;Hill, 2004 & Howerter, 2000), the present study also assesses two further aspects of EF, planning and fluency, which have traditionally been studied in research with frontal lobe patients and those with other neurodevelopmental disorders (Pennington & Ozonoff, 1996).The current paper provides a detailed picture of the strengths and weaknesses of EF in children with DCD.Previous research investigating EF in DCD has reported mixed results. In measures of response inhibition, which require participants to either respond or inhibit their responses depending on the stimulus presented, children with a diagnosis of DCD make a similar number of errors to TD controls (e.g., Pratt, Leonard, Adeyinka, & Hill, 2014;Querne et al., 2008). However, when comparing button presses that were either congruent or incongruent with a visually-presented target, Mandich, Buckolz, and Polatajko (2002) reported that differences in errors between these two conditions were greater for those with DCD compared to TD controls. In tests of switching (e.g., "press button 'a' when you see stimulus Several methodological and interpretational difficulties arising from previous research into EF in DCD were addressed in the current study. One key issue is that many EF tasks require a motor response (such as pressing a button) or complex visuospatial processing, both of which may cause individuals with DCD to perform poorly due to impairments in these (...

Executive function difficulties in children with poor motor skills persist throughout middle childhood. Children with motor difficulties, without a developmental coordination disorder (DCD) diagnosis, demonstrate less pervasive executive function difficulties than those with DCD. Executive function problems in the groups with motor difficulties and DCD affect mostly nonverbal domains. All groups showed similar developmental gains in executive function.

ObjectiveTo determine whether improvements in school age outcomes had occurred between two cohorts of births at 22–25 weeks of gestation to women residents in England in 1995 and 2006.DesignLongitudinal national cohort studies.SettingSchool-based or home-based assessments at 11 years of age.ParticipantsEPICure2 cohort of births at 22–26 weeks of gestation in England during 2006: a sample of 200 of 1031 survivors were evaluated; outcomes for 112 children born at 22–25 weeks of gestation were compared with those of 176 born in England during 1995 from the EPICure cohort. Classroom controls for each group acted as a reference population.Main outcome measuresStandardised measures of cognition and academic attainment were combined with parent report of other impairments to estimate overall neurodevelopmental status.ResultsAt 11 years in EPICure2, 18% had severe and 20% moderate impairments. Comparing births at 22–25 weeks in EPICure2 (n=112), 26% had severe and 21% moderate impairment compared with 18% and 32%, respectively, in EPICure. After adjustment, the OR of moderate or severe neurodevelopmental impairment in 2006 compared with 1995 was 0.76 (95% CI 0.45 to 1.31, p=0.32). IQ scores were similar in 1995 (mean 82.7, SD 18.4) and 2006 (81.4, SD 19.2), adjusted difference in mean z-scores 0.2 SD (95% CI −0.2 to 0.6), as were attainment test scores. The use of multiple imputation did not alter these findings.ConclusionImprovements in care and survival between 1995 and 2006 are not paralleled by improved cognitive or educational outcomes or a reduced rate of neurodevelopmental impairment.

This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent repository link: