Search

Objectives: This study investigated the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth Edition Letter-Number Sequencing (LNS) subtest as an embedded performance validity indicator among adults undergoing an attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) evaluation, and its potential incremental value over Reliable Digit Span (RDS). Method: This cross-sectional study comprised 543 adults who underwent neuropsychological evaluation for ADHD. Patients were divided into valid (n = 480) and invalid (n = 63) groups based on multiple criterion performance validity tests. Results: LNS total raw scores, age-corrected scaled scores, and age- and education-corrected T-scores demonstrated excellent classification accuracy (area under the curve of.84,.83, and.82, respectively). The optimal cutoff for LNS raw score (≤16), age-corrected scaled score (≤7), and age- and education-corrected T-score (≤36) yielded.51 sensitivity and.94 specificity. Slightly lower sensitivity (.40) and higher specificity (.98) was associated with a more conservative T-score cutoff of ≤33. Multivariate models incorporating both LNS and RDS improved classification accuracy (area under the curve of.86), and LNS scores explained a significant but modest proportion of variance in validity status above and beyond RDS. Chaining LNS T-score of ≤33 with RDS cutoff of ≤7 increased sensitivity to.69 while maintaining ≥.90 specificity. Conclusions: Findings provide preliminary evidence for the criterion and construct validity of LNS as an embedded validity indicator in ADHD evaluations. Practitioners are encouraged to use LNS T-score cutoff of ≤33 or ≤36 to assess the validity of obtained test data. Employing either of these LNS cutoffs with RDS may enhance the detection of invalid performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AbstractObjective: Performance below the actual abilities of the examinee can be measured using performance validity tests (PVTs). PVT failure negatively impacts the quality of the neuropsychological assessment. In our study, we addressed this issue by providing a brief corrective statement regarding invalidity to improve test-taking behavior. Methods: This study is a multisite single-blind randomized controlled trial in a consecutive sample of clinically referred adult patients (N = 196) in a general hospital setting. Patients who failed a PVT (n = 71) were randomly allocated to a corrective statement approach (CS; n = 39), in which a brief verbal corrective statement was given by the technician, or received no corrective statement upon indications of invalid performance (NO-CS; n = 32). Both groups (CS and NO-CS) were provided with the same subsequently repeated and newly administered tests. Results: There were no group (CS vs. NO-CS) differences on both the repeated and single-administered PVTs and standard cognitive tests. Furthermore, invalid performing participants benefited significantly less from the repeated test administration compared to the valid performing group. Conclusions: Our study found that a brief corrective within-session statement, to address PVT failure and improve test-taking behavior, did not improve consequent test performance. These results suggest limited value of a brief verbal corrective statement to influence performance below best of capabilities. It highlights the need for more research to identify more effective approaches that can enhance patients test-taking behavior. Ultimately, such efforts are critical in ensuring accurate diagnosis and effective treatment recommendations for patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To determine if similar levels of performance on the Overall Test Battery Mean (OTBM) occur at different forced choice test (FCT) p-value score failures. Second, to determine the OTBM levels that are associated with failures at above chance on various performance validity (PVT) tests. Method: OTBMs were computed from archival data obtained from four practices. We calculated each examinee's Estimated Premorbid Global Ability (EPGA) and OTBM. The sample size was 5,103 examinees with 282 (5.5%) of these scoring below chance at p ≤.20 on at least one FCT. Results: The OTBM associated with a failure at p ≤.20 was equivalent to the OTBM that was associated with failing 6 or more PVTs at above-chance cutoffs. The mean OTBMs relative to increasingly strict FCT p cutoffs were similar (T scores in the 30s). As expected, there was an inverse relationship between the number of PVTs failed and examinees' OTBMs. Conclusions: The data support the use of p ≤.20 as the probability level for testing the significance of below chance performance on FCTs. The OTBM can be used to index the influence of invalid performance on outcomes, especially when an examinee scores below chance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Differential diagnosis of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common referral questions for neuropsychological evaluation but is complicated by the presence of external incentives. Validity assessment is therefore critical in such evaluations, employing symptom validity tests (SVTs) and performance validity tests (PVTs) to assess the validity of reported symptoms and cognitive test performance, respectively. This study aimed to establish the base rate of symptom and performance invalidity in adults referred for ADHD, compare concordance between performance and symptom validity, and assess the impact of each type of validity on cognitive test performance. Method: This consecutive case series included data from 392 demographically-diverse adults who underwent outpatient neuropsychological evaluation for ADHD. All patients were administered the Clinical Assessment of Attention Deficit-Adult (CAT-A) and a uniform cognitive test battery, including seven PVTs. Results: Invalid symptom reporting and PVT performance were found in 22% and 16% of the sample, respectively. Sixty-eight percent had concordantly valid SVTs/PVTs and 6% had invalid SVTs/PVTs, whereas the remaining 26% had either invalid SVTs or PVTs (but not both). Invalid PVT performance resulted in a significant decrease across all cognitive test scores, with generally large effects (ηp2=.01-.18). Invalid symptom reporting had minimal effects on cognitive test performance (ηp2= ≤.04). Conclusions: PVTs and SVTs are dissociable and therefore should not be used interchangeably in the context of adult ADHD evaluations. Rather, symptom and performance validity should continue to be assessed independently as they provide largely non-redundant information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: While assessment of performance validity is essential to neuropsychological evaluations, use of performance validity tests (PVTs) in an epilepsy population has raised concerns due to factors that may result in performance fluctuations. The current study assessed whether specificity was maintained at previously suggested cutoffs in a confirmed epilepsy population on the Warrington Recognition Memory Test (WRMT) – Words and Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM). Method: Eighty-two confirmed epilepsy patients were administered the WRMT-Words and TOMM as part of a standardized neuropsychological evaluation. Frequency tables were utilized to investigate specificity rates on these two PVTs. Results: The suggested WRMT-Words Accuracy Score cutoff of ≤42 was associated with a specificity rate of 90.2%. Five out of the 8 individuals falling below the Accuracy Score cutoff scored 42, suggesting specificity could be further improved by slightly lowering the cutoff. The WRMT-Words Total Time cutoff of ≥207 seconds was associated with 95.1% specificity. A TOMM Trial 1 cutoff of <40 was associated with 93.9% specificity, while the established cutoff of <45 on Trial 2 and the Retention Trial yielded specificity rates of 98.6% and 100.0%, respectively. Conclusions: Our findings demonstrate acceptable performance on two PVTs in a select confirmed epilepsy population without a history of brain surgery, active seizures during testing, and/or low IQ, irrespective of various factors such as seizure type, seizure lateralization/localization, and language lateralization. The possible presence of interictal discharges were not controlled for in the current study, which may have contributed to reduced PVT performances. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ObjectiveThe study was designed to expand on the results of previous investigations on the D-KEFS Stroop as a performance validity test (PVT), which produced diverging conclusions. Method The classification accuracy of previously proposed validity cutoffs on the D-KEFS Stroop was computed against four different criterion PVTs in two independent samples: patients with uncomplicated mild TBI (n = 68) and disability benefit applicants (n = 49). Results Age-corrected scaled scores (ACSSs) ≤6 on individual subtests often fell short of specificity standards. Making the cutoffs more conservative improved specificity, but at a significant cost to sensitivity. In contrast, multivariate models (≥3 failures at ACSS ≤6 or ≥2 failures at ACSS ≤5 on the four subtests) produced good combinations of sensitivity (.39-.79) and specificity (.85-1.00), correctly classifying 74.6-90.6% of the sample. A novel validity scale, the D-KEFS Stroop Index correctly classified between 78.7% and 93.3% of the sample. Conclusions A multivariate approach to performance validity assessment provides a methodological safeguard against sample- and instrument-specific fluctuations in classification accuracy, strikes a reasonable balance between sensitivity and specificity, and mitigates the invalid before impaired paradox. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To determine if the number of participants with psychiatric disorders increased in association with failures on symptom validity tests (SVTs) and a performance validity test (PVT) in Veterans admitted for evaluation of possible seizures. The 254 participants were Veterans undergoing inpatient video-EEG monitoring for the diagnosis of possible seizures. DSM-IV psychiatric disorders were diagnosed with the SCID IV. Symptom exaggeration was assessed with the MMPI-2-RF and performance validity with the TOMM. On the MMPI-2-RF, 27.6%–32.7% showed symptom exaggeration. Participants who exaggerated on the MMPI-2-RF were more often diagnosed with psychiatric disorders. The TOMM was failed by 15.4% of the sample. Participants who failed the TOMM were more often diagnosed with an Axis I disorder but not with a personality disorder. The MMPI-2-RF was invalid in more cases than the TOMM, but 7.9% of the sample generated a valid MMPI-2-RF and an invalid TOMM. The correlational design does not allow conclusions about cause and effect. The invalid groups may have had a higher rate of psychopathology. The number of participants with psychiatric disorders increased in association with symptom exaggeration and performance invalidity. Symptom exaggeration was more frequent than performance invalidity, but the TOMM made a unique contribution to identification of invalidity. The routine clinical use of SVTs and PVTs is supported. The results also suggest the need for caution in diagnosing psychiatric disorders when there is symptom exaggeration or performance invalidity, because diagnostic validity is dependent on the accuracy of symptom reporting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using embedded performance validity (PVT) comparisons, Erdodi et al. suggested that Grooved Pegboard (GPB) T-score cutoffs for either hand ( ≤ 29) or both hands ( ≤ 31) could be used as additional embedded PVTs. The current study evaluated the relationship between these proposed cutoff scores and established PVTs (Medical Symptom Validity Test [MSVT]; Non-Verbal Medical Symptom Validity Test [NV-MSVT], and Reliable Digit Span [RDS]). Participants (N = 178) were predominately Caucasian (84%) males (79%) with a mean age and education of 41 (SD = 11.7) and 15.8 years (SD = 2.3), respectively. Participants were stratified as "passing" or "failing" the GPBviaErdodi's proposed criteria. "Failures" on the MSVT, NV-MSVT, and RDS were based on conventional recommendations. Moderate correlations between GPB classification and a condition of interest (COI; i.e. at least two failures on reference PVTs) were observed for dominant (χ2 (1, n = 178) = 34.72, ϕ =.44, p <.001), non-dominant (χ2 (1, n = 178) = 16.46, ϕ =.30, p =.001), and both hand conditions (χ2 (1, n = 178) = 32.48, ϕ =.43, p <.001). Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive power were generally higher than Erdodi et al.'s initial findings. These findingsprovide supportfor the clinical utility of the GPB as an additional embedded PVT. More specifically, dominant and both hand cutoffs were found to be more robust measures ofnon-genuine performance in those without motor deficits. While promising, sensitivity continues to be low; therefore, it is ill-advised to use the GPB as a sole measure of -performance validity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To cross-validate RAVLT performance validity cut-offs and the RAVLT/RO discriminant function in a large neuropsychological sample. RAVLT scores and the RAVLT/RO discriminant function were compared in credible (n = 100) and noncredible (n = 353) neuropsychology referrals. Noncredible patients scored lower than credible patients on RAVLT scores and the RAVLT/RO discriminant function. With cut-offs set to ≥90% specificity, highest sensitivities were observed for the discriminant function (cut-off ≤.064; 55.8%), recognition total (cut-off ≤9; 53.1%), the recognition combination score (≤10; 47.7%), and total learning across trials (cut-off ≤31; 45.3%). Individuals with histories of learning difficulties were over-represented in the 10% of credible patients exceeding cut-offs. When these individuals were removed, cut-offs could be tightened while still maintaining at least 90% specificity, and thereby increasing sensitivity (e.g., recognition total cut-off ≤10, 65% sensitivity; RAVLT/RO discriminant function cut-off ≤.176, 58% sensitivity). When three of the most sensitive, non-overlapping scores were considered in combination, 17% of credible patients failed ≥1 of the three cut-offs, while 3% failed two, and only 1% failed all three. In contrast, in the noncredible sample, more than two-thirds failed one or more of the three cut-offs, nearly half failed ≥2, and nearly a quarter failed all three. RAVLT PVT cut-offs and the RAVLT/RO discriminant function achieve approximately 50% sensitivity, and approach 65% sensitivity when cut-offs specific to samples without histories of learning problems are employed, confirming that RAVLT cut-offs and the RAVLT/RO discriminant function continue to be valuable techniques in the identification of performance invalidity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Performance validity assessment is an important component of concussion baseline testing and Immediate Post-Concussion and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT) is the most commonly used test in this setting. A review of invalid performance on ImPACT was published in 2017, focusing largely on the default embedded validity indicator (Default EVI) provided within the test. There has since been a proliferation in research evaluating the classification accuracy of the Default EVI against independently developed, alternative ImPACT-based EVIs, necessitating an updated review. The purpose of this study was to provide an up-to-date review of the prevalence of invalid performance on ImPACT and to examine the relative effectiveness of ImPACT-based EVIs. Method: Literature related to the prevalence of invalid performance on ImPACT and the effectiveness of ImPACT-based EVIs, published between January 2000 and May 2020, was critically reviewed. Results: A total of 23 studies reported prevalence of invalid performance at baseline testing using ImPACT. Six percent of baseline assessments were found to be invalid by the ImPACT's Default EVI, and between 22.31% and 34.99% were flagged by alternative EVIs. Six studies assessed the effectiveness of ImPACT-based EVIs, with the Default EVI correctly identifying experimental malingerers only 60% of the time. Alternative ImPACT-based EVIs identified between 73% and 100% of experimental malingerers. Conclusions: The ImPACT's Default EVI is not sufficiently sensitive, and clinicians should consider alternative indicators when assessing invalid performance. Accordingly, the base rate of invalid performance in athletes at baseline testing is likely well above the 6% previously reported. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The addition of Sequencing to WAIS-IV Digit Span (DS) brought about new Reliable Digit Span (RDS) indices and an Age-Corrected Scaled Score that includes Sequencing trials. Reports have indicated that these new performance validity tests (PVTs) are superior to the traditional RDS; however, comparisons in the context of known neurocognitive impairment are sparse. This study compared DS-derived PVT classification accuracies in a design that included adults with verified TBI. Methods: Participants included 64 adults with moderate-to-severe TBI (TBI), 51 healthy adults coached to simulate TBI (SIM), and 78 healthy comparisons (HC). Participants completed the WAIS-IV DS subtest in the context of a larger test battery. Results: Kruskal–Wallis tests indicated that all DS indices differed significantly across groups. Post hoc contrasts revealed that only RDS Forward and the traditional RDS differed significantly between SIM and TBI. ROC analyses indicated that RDS variables were comparable predictors of SIM vs. HC; however, the traditional RDS showed the highest sensitivity when approximating 90% specificity for SIM vs. TBI. A greater percentage of TBI scored RDS Sequencing < 1 compared to SIM and HC. Conclusion: In the context of moderate-to-severe TBI, the DS-derived PVTs showed comparable discriminability. However, the Greiffenstein et al. traditional RDS demonstrated the best classification accuracy with respect to specificity/sensitivity balance. This relative superiority may reflect that individuals with verified TBI are more likely to perseverate on prior instructions during DS Sequencing. Findings highlight the importance of including individuals with verified TBI when evaluating and developing PVTs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This cross-sectional study examined the effect of number of Performance Validity Test (PVT) failures on neuropsychological test performance among a demographically diverse Veteran (VA) sample (n = 76) and academic medical sample (AMC; n = 128). A secondary goal was to investigate the psychometric implications of including versus excluding those with one PVT failure when cross-validating a series of embedded PVTs. Method: All patients completed the same six criterion PVTs, with the AMC sample completing three additional embedded PVTs. Neurocognitive test performance differences were examined based on number of PVT failures (0, 1, 2+) for both samples, and effect of number of criterion failures on embedded PVT performance was analyzed among the AMC sample. Results: Both groups with 0 or 1 PVT failures performed better than those with ≥2 PVT failures across most cognitive tests. There were nonsignificant differences between those with 0 or 1 PVT failures except for one test in the AMC sample. Receiver operator characteristic curve analyses found no differences in optimal cut score based on number of PVT failures when retaining/excluding one PVT failure. Conclusion: Findings support the use of ≥2 PVT failures as indicative of performance invalidity. These findings strongly support including those with one PVT failure with those with zero PVT failures in diagnostic accuracy studies, given that their inclusion reflects actual clinical practice, does not reduce sample sizes, and does not artificially deflate neurocognitive test results or inflate PVT classification accuracy statistics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective We sought to determine the accuracy of embedded performance measures for the D–KEFS Color Word Interference Test that were recently proposed by Eglit et al. In particular, we wanted to determine if these indices would be associated with a specificity of at least.90, an Area Under the Curve of at least.70 and a positive likelihood ratio of at least 2. Method: We used logistic regression to investigate how well these indices could distinguish persons with traumatic brain injury (n = 169) who were evaluated within 1-12 months after injury. All participants had been classified on the basis of at least three independent performance validity tests as valid performance (n = 145) or invalid performance (n = 24). Results: None of the three indices that Eglit et al. had proposed as embedded performance measures for the D–KEFS Color Word Interference Test achieved the a priori defined minimally acceptable level of specificity. One of them did meet the criteria for Area Under the Curve as well as positive likelihood ratio. Conclusion: The current results do not support the application of the Eglit et al. embedded performance validity measures for the D–KEFS Color Word Interference Test in the clinical evaluation of patients with traumatic brain injury. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examined the specificity of both individual PVTs and three different PVT batteries in individuals undergoing neuropsychological evaluation for dementia in order to establish both appropriate individual test cutoffs and multiple-PVT failure criterion. Participants were 311 validly performing patients with no cognitive impairment (n = 24), mild cognitive impairment (MCI; n = 115), mild dementia (n = 122), or moderate dementia (n = 50). Cutoffs associated with ≥90% specificity were established for 11 individual PVTs across impairment severity groups. Aggregate false positive rates according to number of PVTs failed were examined for two 4-PVT batteries and one 7-PVT battery. One-way ANOVAs with post-hoc comparisons were conducted for each PVT. Performance on 9 of 11 PVTs significantly differed according to impairment severity. PVT cutoffs achieving ≥90% specificity also generally varied by group. For PVTs previously validated in non-dementia samples, slight adjustments from established cutoffs were generally required to maintain adequate specificity in MCI and mild dementia groups, with greater modifications required in the moderate dementia group. A criterion of ≥2 PVT failures resulted in ≥90% specificity in both 4-PVT batteries across groups. In the 7-PVT battery, adequate specificity was achieved with ≥2 failures in MCI and ≥3 failures in the mild dementia group. The incorporation and interpretation of several easily assimilated multiple-PVT batteries in dementia evaluations are explored. Additionally, data regarding individual PVT performance according to cognitive impairment severity are provided to aide validity assessment of both patients undergoing dementia evaluation and examinees who are less impaired. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study was designed to replicate previous research on embedded validity indicators (EVIs) in the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test – Revised (HVLT-R) and introduce a new forced choice recognition trial (FCR). Undergraduate research volunteers were randomly assigned (MAge = 21.7; MEducation = 14.5 years, 85% female) to either the control or experimental malingering condition, and were administered a brief battery of neuropsychological tests. Recognition memory based EVIs (both existing and newly introduced) effectively discriminated credible and non-credible response sets. An FCR ≤11 produced.59 sensitivity and perfect specificity to invalid responding. A Recognition Discrimination (RD) score ≤8 also produced a good combination of sensitivity (.35) and specificity (.96). The FCR trial made unique contributions to performance validity assessment above and beyond previously published EVIs. RD achieved ≥.90 specificity at higher cutoffs than previously reported. The newly introduced FCR trial has the potential to enhance the existing arsenal of EVIs within the HVLT-R. However, it must demonstrate its ability to differentiate genuine impairment from non-credible responding before it can be recommended for clinical use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While the Neuropsychological Assessment Battery, Screening Module (S-NAB) is a commonly used cognitive screening measure, no composite embedded performance validity test (PVT) formula has yet been described within it. This study sought to empirically derive PVT formulas within the S-NAB using an analog simulation paradigm. Seventy-two university students (M age = 18.92) were randomly assigned to either an Asymptomatic (AS) or simulated mild traumatic brain injury (S-mTBI) group and were administered a neuropsychological test battery that included the S-NAB and standalone and embedded PVTs. The AS group was instructed to perform optimally, and the S-mTBI group received symptom and test coaching to help simulate mTBI-related impairment. Both groups received warnings regarding the presence of PVTs throughout the test battery. Groups showed significant differences (all ps <.001) on all S-NAB domain scores and PVTs. In the S-NAB, the Attention (S-ATT) and Executive Function (S-EXE) domains showed the largest effect sizes (Cohen's ds = 2.02 and 1.79, respectively). Seven raw scores from S-ATT and S-EXE subtests were entered as predictor variables in a direct logistic regression (LR). The model accurately classified 90.3% of cases. Two PVT formulas were described: (1) an exponentiated equation from LR results and (2) an arithmetic formula using four individually meaningful variables. Both formulas demonstrated outstanding discriminability between groups (AUCs =.96–.97) and yielded good classification statistics compared to other PVTs. This study is the first to describe composite, embedded PVT formulas within the S-NAB. Implications, limitations, and appropriate future directions of inquiry are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Embedded validity measures are useful in neuropsychological evaluations but should be updated with new test versions and validated across various samples. This study evaluated Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, 4th edition (WAIS-IV) Digit Span validity indicators in post-deployment veterans. Method: Neurologically-intact veterans completed structured diagnostic interviews, the WAIS-IV, the Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT), and the b Test as part of a larger study. The Noncredible group included individuals who failed either the MSVT or the b Test. Of the total sample (N = 275), 21.09% failed the MSVT and/or b Test. Diagnostic accuracy was calculated predicting group status across cutoff scores on two Digit Span variables, four Reliable Digit Span (RDS) variables, and two Vocabulary minus Digit Span variables. Results: Digit Span age-corrected scaled score (ACSS) had the highest AUC (.648) of all measures assessed; however, sensitivity at the best cutoff of <7 was only 0.17. Of RDS measures, the Working Memory RDS resulted in the highest AUC (.629), but Enhanced RDS and Alternate RDS produced the highest sensitivities (0.22). Overall, cutoff scores were consistent with other studies, but sensitivities were lower. Vocabulary minus Digit Span measures were not significant. Conclusions: Digit Span ACSS was the strongest predictor of noncredible performance, and outperformed traditional RDS variants. Sensitivity across all validity indicators was low in this research sample, though cutoff scores were congruent with previous research. Although embedded Digit Span validity indicators may be useful, they are not sufficient to replace standalone performance validity tests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study investigated sensitivity and specificity rates of four Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) indices (Trial 1, Trial 2, Retention, and Albany Consistency Index (ACI)) and examined how classification accuracy rates change when utilizing these indices in various combinations. Method: A sample of 202 neuropsychological outpatients was utilized. Patients were categorized as valid performers if they passed all criterion performance validity tests (PVTs) and were determined to be invalid performers if they failed two or more criterion PVTs. Classification accuracy statistics were obtained for individual TOMM indices as well as combinations of TOMM indices. Results: When using only Trial 1 as a validity indicator, the TOMM identified 57% of invalidly performing individuals. When all TOMM indices were examined, the ACI demonstrated the highest sensitivity value (63%) but it also demonstrated the lowest specificity value (91%). Allowing for failure of any of the four TOMM indices provided the best overall sensitivity value (67%) while maintaining adequate specificity (90%). Finally, it was determined that failure of three or more TOMM validity indices resulted in a specificity rate of 97% and failure of four of more TOMM validity indices resulted in a specificity rate of 98%. Conclusions: Classification accuracy of TOMM validity indices are discussed in relation to positive and negative predictive values. Results suggest that clinicians can examine all four TOMM validity indices concurrently, particularly in settings where high base rates of invalidity occur. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Discrimination of patients passing vs. failing the Word Memory Test (WMT) by performance on 11 performance and symptom validity tests (PVTs, SVTs) from the Meyers Neuropsychological Battery (MNB) at per-test false positive cutoffs ranging from 0 to 15%. PVT and SVT intercorrelation in subgroups passing and failing the WMT, as well as the degree of skew of the individual PVTs and SVT in the pass/fail subgroups, were also analyzed. Method: In 255 clinical and forensic cases, 100 failed and 155 passed the WMT, at a base-rate of invalid performance of 39.2%. Performance was contrasted on 10 PVTs and 1 SVT from the MNB, using per-test false positive rates of 0.0%, 3.3%, 5.0%, 10.0%, and 15.0% in discriminating WMT pass and WMT fail groups. These two WMT groups were also contrasted using the 10 PVTs and 1 SVT as continuous variables in a logistic regression. Results: The per-PVT false positive rate of 10% yielded the highest WMT pass/fail classification, and more closely approximated the classification obtained by logistic regression than other cut scores. PVT and SVT correlations were higher in cases failing the WMT, and data were more highly skewed in those passing the WMT. Conclusions: The optimal per-PVT and SVT cutoff is at a false positive rate of 10%, with failure of ≥3 PVTs/SVTs out of 11 yielding sensitivity of 61.0% and specificity of 90.3%. PVTs with the best classification had the greatest degree of skew in the WMT pass subgroup. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Performance validity tests (PVTs) are essential in neuropsychological evaluations; however, it has been questioned how PVTs function in the context of cognitive impairment, and whether cognitive impairment alone is sufficient to cause PVT failure. Further, there is concern that some clinicians will disregard failed PVTs due to their perception that failures represent false-positive errors secondary to cognitive impairment. This study examined patterns associated with cognitively impaired versus noncredible performance across a battery of PVTs and neuropsychological tests. Additionally, the impact of VA service-connection and disability-seeking status on test validity was investigated. Method: A mixed-clinical sample of 103 veterans were administered six PVTs and neuropsychological tests. Performance was compared across three groups: valid-cognitively unimpaired, valid-cognitively impaired, and noncredible. Results: Significant PVT score differences and failure rates emerged across the three groups, with nonsignificant to small differences between valid-unimpaired and valid-impaired groups, and large differences between impaired and noncredible groups. In contrast, there were nonsignificant to small differences on neuropsychological tests between the valid-impaired and noncredible groups, indicating that impaired participants performed significantly better on PVTs despite comparable neurocognitive test scores. Service-connection rating itself was not associated with PVT failure, but an active disability claim to increase and/or establish service connection was associated with worse PVT performance. Conclusion: This study supports the use of multiple PVTs during evaluations of patients with varied cognitive abilities. Results indicated increased risk of PVT failure in patients who were seeking initiation/increase in service-connected payments, and shows that cognitive impairment does not cause PVT failure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study investigated whether indices within the Brief Visuospatial Memory Test – Revised (BVMT-R) could function as embedded performance validity measures in an outpatient clinical sample. Method: A sample of 138 neuropsychological outpatients was utilized; approximately 45% had a known or suspected external incentive. Patients were determined to be valid performers if they passed all criterion performance validity tests (PVTs) and determined to be invalid performers if they failed two or more PVTs. BVMT-R indices met criteria for optimal embedded PVTs if they were not significantly correlated with genuine cognitive dysfunction and if they adequately differentiated the validly from invalidly performing patient groups. Classification accuracy statistics for the indices were then calculated. Supplementary analyses were also calculated for a separate dementia sample. Results: Recognition Hits and Recognition Discrimination were identified as two optimal embedded PVTs for patients without dementia. Recognition Hits showed a sensitivity rate of 41% and a specificity rate of 95%. Recognition Discrimination showed a sensitivity rate of 54% and a specificity rate of 93%. Conclusion: Embedded BVMT-R PVTs are discussed in relation to previous research findings, which were obtained from veteran samples. Recognition Hits and Recognition Discrimination are now validated in a non-veteran clinical sample. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examined the relationship among performance validity test (PVT) failure, number of PVTs administered, and participant characteristics including demographic, diagnostic, functional, and contextual factors in a clinical sample (N= 158) of outpatient physiatry referrals. The number of PVTs failed and the number administered showed a small non-significant correlation (rs= .13,p= .10). Participant characteristics showed associations with PVT failure consistent with prior research. A negative binomial regression model was fitted using number of PVTs failed as outcome and age, education, number of PVTs administered, clinical versus medico-legal context, and functional status as predictors. Although education and functional status were significant predictors of number of PVTs failed, the number of PVTs administered was not. A second analytic approach focused on observed false positive rates in a neurologic no-incentive (NNI) sample subset (n= 87). In contrast to a recent proposal based on statistical simulation, observed false positive rates were lower than predicted rates in NNI participants administered six, seven, or eight PVTs using a two-PVT failure cutoff. These results are interpreted as mitigating concerns that increased PVT failure is necessarily the outcome of increased PVT administration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]