Similar articles

• Differential validity of the K-ABC for lower functioning preschool children versus those of higher ability.

  Bloom AS, Allard AM, Zelko FA, Brill WJ, Topinka CW, Pfohl W. Bloom AS, et al. Am J Ment Retard. 1988 Nov;93(3):273-7. Am J Ment Retard. 1988. PMID: 3228519
• The French pictorial test of intelligence and the Stanford-Binet, L-M: a concurrent validity study with physically impaired children.

  Harper DC, Tanners H. Harper DC, et al. J Clin Psychol. 1974 Apr;30(2):178-80. doi: 10.1002/1097-4679(197404)30:2<178::aid-jclp2270300216>3.0.co;2-o. J Clin Psychol. 1974. PMID: 4281002 No abstract available.
• Use of the Stanford-Binet, form LM, with retardates: a review of recent research.

  Himelstein P. Himelstein P. Am J Ment Defic. 1968 Mar;72(5):691-9. Am J Ment Defic. 1968. PMID: 4872302 Review. No abstract available.
• Ratio developmental quotients from the Bayley are comparable to later IQs from the Stanford-Binet.

  Goldstein DJ, Sheaffer CI. Goldstein DJ, et al. Am J Ment Retard. 1988 Jan;92(4):379-80. Am J Ment Retard. 1988. PMID: 3342140
• Prediction of five-year Stanford-Binet scores in preterm infants.

  Cohen SE, Parmelee AH. Cohen SE, et al. Child Dev. 1983 Oct;54(5):1242-53. Child Dev. 1983. PMID: 6354631 Review.