title: Neurobehavioral outcomes in spina bifida: Processes versus outcomes.
abstract: We review neurobehavioral outcomes and interventions for children with spina bifida. Focusing on children with spina bifida myelomeningocele, we contrast historical views of outcomes based on comparisons across content domains (e.g., language versus visual perceptual skills) with a view based on overarching processes that underlie strengths and weakness within content domains. Thus, we suggest that children with SBM have strengths when the skill involves the capacity to retrieve information from semantic memory and generate material that has been associatively linked or learned (associative processing) and general difficulties on tasks that require the construction or integration of a response (assembled processing). We use a hypothetical case to illustrate the differences in content domains versus general processes and also identify interventions that may be effective in addressing some of the cognitive and behavioral difficulties experienced variably by people with SBM. We extend these general principles to a discussion of variability in outcomes and use data from a large sample of children with spina bifida to illustrate the basis for this variability.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
authors.forename: Jack M
authors.initials: JM
authors.lastname: Fletcher
authors.forename: Kathryn K
authors.initials: KK
authors.lastname: Ostermaier
authors.forename: Paul T
authors.initials: PT
authors.lastname: Cirino
authors.forename: Maureen
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Dennis
references.citation: Am J Med Genet. 2000 Nov 6;95(1):21-7
references.pmid: 11074490
references.citation: J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2006 Mar;12(2):285-96
references.pmid: 16573862
references.citation: Brain Lang. 2001 Jan;76(1):35-44
references.pmid: 11161353
references.citation: Child Neuropsychol. 2005 Jun;11(3):265-83
references.pmid: 16036451
references.citation: J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2003 May;9(4):642-52
references.pmid: 12755176
references.citation: Dev Neuropsychol. 2002;21(2):141-55
references.pmid: 12139196
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2005 Apr;112(2):329-46
references.pmid: 15783289
references.citation: Br J Disord Commun. 1979 Sep;14(2):89-101
references.pmid: 393294
references.citation: J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2004 Oct;10(6):877-87
references.pmid: 15637778
references.citation: Adv Child Dev Behav. 1979;14:253-319
references.pmid: 44640
references.citation: J Dev Behav Pediatr. 2006 Jun;27(3):249-77
references.pmid: 16775524
references.citation: J Neurosurg. 2005 Apr;102(3 Suppl):268-79
references.pmid: 15881750
references.citation: J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2002 Jan;8(1):95-106
references.pmid: 11843078
references.citation: J Learn Disabil. 2006 Mar-Apr;39(2):174-87
references.pmid: 16583797
references.citation: Pediatr Rehabil. 1999 Jan-Mar;3(1):29-35
references.pmid: 10367291
references.citation: Pediatrics. 2001 Oct;108(4):1033-44
references.pmid: 11581465
references.citation: Neuropsychology. 1998 Oct;12(4):578-89
references.pmid: 9805328
references.citation: Brain. 2004 Jun;127(Pt 6):1292-301
references.pmid: 15069019
references.citation: J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1992 Jul;14(4):593-609
references.pmid: 1400921
references.citation: Brain Lang. 2005 Jun;93(3):349-68
references.pmid: 15862859
references.citation: Child Dev. 1993 Aug;64(4):1005-21
references.pmid: 8404253
references.citation: Disabil Rehabil. 2000 May 10;22(7):299-307
references.pmid: 10877483
references.citation: Dev Med Child Neurol. 1992 Jun;34(6):488-98
references.pmid: 1612208