Brief Report: Contrasting Profiles of Everyday Executive Functioning in Smith–Magenis Syndrome and Down Syndrome
Everyday executive function (EF) was examined in Smith–Magenis syndrome (SMS), associated with high risk of behaviour disorder, and Down syndrome (DS), associated with relatively low risk of behaviour disorder. Caregivers of 13 children with SMS and 17 with DS rated everyday EF using the Behavioral Rating Inventory of Executive Functioning-Preschool. Greater everyday EF deficits relative to adaptive ability were evident in SMS than in DS. The SMS profile of everyday EF abilities was relatively uniform; in DS emotional control strengths and working memory weaknesses were evident. Findings implicate broad everyday EF difficulties in SMS compared to DS, corresponding with increased rates of behaviour disorder in SMS. Findings further suggest that everyday EF profiles may, in part, be syndrome related.
KeywordsExecutive function BRIEF-P Smith–Magenis syndrome Down syndrome
The research reported here was supported by funding from Cerebra. The authors would like to thank all participants and their families. The authors are indebted to the Smith-Magenis Foundation UK and the Down’s Syndrome Association for their assistance with recruitment of children with Smith–Magenis syndrome and Down syndrome, respectively.
LW conceived of the study, participated in its design and coordination, performed the statistical analyses, participated in the interpretation of the data, and drafted the manuscript. CO conceived of the study, participated in its design and interpretation of the data, and helped to draft the manuscript. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Cohen, J. (1988), Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Gioia, G. A., Isquith, P. K., Guy, S. C., & Kenworthy, L. (2000). Behavior rating inventory of executive function. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
- Gioia, G. A., Espy, K. A., & Isquith, P. K. (2003). BRIEF-P: Behavior rating inventory of executive function-preschool version: Professional manual. Lutz: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
- Greenberg, F., Guzzetta, V., Deocaluna, R. M., Magenis, R. E., Smith, A. C. M., Richter, S. F., … Lupski, & J, R. (1991). Molecular analysis of the Smith-Magenis syndrome—A possible contiguous-gene syndrome associated with del(17)(P11.2). American Journal of Human Genetics, 49(6), 1207–1218.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Lee, N. R., Anand, P., Will, E., Adeyemi, E. I., Clasen, L. S., Blumenthal, J. D., … Edgin, & J, O. (2015). Everyday executive functions in Down syndrome from early childhood to young adulthood: Evidence for both unique and shared characteristics compared to youth with sex chromosome trisomy (XXX and XXY). Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 9, 264.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Lee, N. R., Fidler, D. J., Blakeley-Smith, A., Daunhauer, L., Robinson, C., & Hepburn, S. L. (2011). Caregiver report of executive functioning in a population-based sample of young children with Down syndrome. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 116(4), 290–304.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Schalock, R. L., Borthwick-Duffy, S. A., Bradley, V. J., Buntinx, W. H., Coulter, D. L., Craig, E. M., & Yeager, M. H. (2010). Intellectual disability: Definition, classification, and systems of supports (p. 259). Washington, DC: American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.Google Scholar
- Sparrow, S. S., Balla, D. A., Cicchetti, D. V., Harrison, P. L., & Doll, E. A. (1984). Vineland adaptive behavior scales. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.Google Scholar
- Sparrow, S., Cicchetti, D., & Balla, D. (2005). Vineland adaptive behavior scales: (Vineland II), survey interview form/caregiver rating form. Livonia, MN: Pearson Assessments.Google Scholar
- Stores, R., Stores, G., Fellows, B., & Buckley, S. (1998). Daytime behaviour problems and maternal stress in children with Down’s syndrome, their siblings, and non-intellectually disabled and other intellectually disabled peers. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 42(3), 228–237.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Tassé, M. J., Schalock, R. L., Balboni, G., Bersani, H. Jr., Borthwick-Duffy, S. A., Spreat, S., … Zhang, D (2012). The construct of adaptive behavior: Its conceptualization, measurement, and use in the field of intellectual disability. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 117(4), 291–303.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar