Search

The literature lacks information on the performance of patients with brain tumors on the Wechsler Intelligence Scales. This study aimed to explore the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Third Edition (WAIS-III) performance profile of 23 consecutive patients with brain tumors and 23 matched controls selected from the Portuguese WAIS-III standardization sample, using the technical manual steps recommended for score interpretation. The control group was demographically matched to the tumor group regarding gender, age, education, profession, and geographic region. The technical manual steps recommended for score interpretation were applied. Patients with brain tumors had significantly lower performances on the Performance IQ, Full-Scale IQ, Perceptual Organization Index, Working Memory Index, Processing Speed Index, Arithmetic, Object Assembly, and Picture Arrangement, though all scaled scores were within the normal range according to the manual tables. Only Vocabulary and Comprehension scatter scores were statistically different between groups. No strengths or weaknesses were found for either group. The mean discrepancy scores do not appear to have clinical value for this population. In conclusion, the study results did not reveal a specific profile for patients with brain tumors on the WAIS-III. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The validity of the Cambridge Neuropsychological Automated Tests has been widely studied, but their reliability has not. This study aimed to estimate the test-retest reliability of these tests in a sample of 34 older adults, aged 69 to 90 years old, without neuropsychiatric diagnoses and living in retirement homes in the district of Lisbon, Portugal. The battery was administered twice, with a 4-week interval between sessions. The Paired Associates Learning (PAL), Spatial Working Memory (SWM), Rapid Visual Information Processing, and Reaction Time tests revealed measures with high-to-adequate test-retest correlations (.71-.89), although several PAL and SWM measures showed susceptibility to practice effects. Two estimated standardized regression-based methods were found to be more efficient at correcting for practice effects than a method of fixed correction. We also found weak test-retest correlations (.56-.68) for several measures. These results suggest that some, but not all, measures are suitable for cognitive assessment and monitoring in this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]