Dynamic occupation assessment of executive function in adolescents with schizophrenia spectrum disorders: An initial report

Abstract

The DOAEF may be useful in assessing the level of mediation, which patients need for the comprehension of daily situations in which EFs are required.

Assessing Executive Function in Adolescence: A Scoping Review of Existing Measures and Their Psychometric Robustness

“…The reported reliability and validity of each of these six measures of EF is presented in Table 4. In summary, their internal consistency ranged between 0.60 and 0.97 (acceptable to excellent); only one study (Chubarov et al, 2015) reported inter-rater reliability and test-retest reliability (for DOAEF) as 0.97 and 0.91, respectively; only one study (Duke et al, 2014) reported inter-informant reliability (for DREFS) as 0.73. Validity aspects that were examined for some of these six measures included construct, convergent, discriminant, and concurrent validities.…”

“…The six additional rating scales with reported psychometrics were: the Dynamic Occupation Assessment of Executive Function (DOAEF; Chubarov et al, 2015); Diabetes Related Executive Functioning Scale (DREFS; Duke et al, 2014); Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System (BIS/BAS; Carver and White, 1994); EpiTrack Junior® (Kadish et al, 2013); Amsterdam Executive Function Inventory (AEFI; Van der Elst et al, 2012); and Ballet Executive Scale (BES; Wong et al, 2012). The reported reliability and validity of each of these six measures of EF is presented in Table 4.…”

“…Availability of many validated EF rating scales will provide researchers or clinicians a range of options to choose from, but most importantly, enhance the functional and ecological validity of their measurement (Chan et al, 2008). Researchers are already working toward this, if recently developed and validated rating scales such as the Amsterdam Executive Function Inventory (AEFI; Van der Elst et al, 2012), Diabetes Related Executive Function Scale (DREFS; Duke et al, 2014), or Dynamic Occupation Assessment of Executive Function (DOAEF; Chubarov et al, 2015) is anything to go by.…”

“…The reported psychometrics characteristics were mainly for EF rating scales (28 out of the 48 studies). These rating scales include the BRIEF (Gioia et al, 2000; Guy et al, 2004), DOAEF (Chubarov et al, 2015), DREFS (Duke et al, 2014), AEFI (Van der Elst et al, 2012), EpiTrack Junior® (Kadish et al, 2013), the Ballet Executive Scale (BES; Wong et al, 2012), and Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System (BIS/BAS; Carver and White, 1994). All, except BIS/BAS have been developed and validated within the last decade.…”

“…In the new millennium, researchers have also begun to broaden ways of assessing EF among children and adolescents by including self or informant reported questionnaires designed to index children's everyday EF skills. Examples of such EF rating scales include measures such as the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF; Gioia et al, 2000; Guy et al, 2004), the Dysexecutive Questionnaire for Children (DEX-C; Emslie et al, 2003), Amsterdam Executive Function Inventory (AEFI; Van der Elst et al, 2012) and most recently the Dynamic Occupation Assessment of Executive Function (DOAEF; Chubarov et al, 2015).…”