Search

Objective: To critically review contemporary theoretical models, diagnostic approaches, clinical features, and assessment findings in Functional Cognitive Disorder (FCD), and make recommendations for neuropsychological evaluation of this condition. Method: Narrative review. Results: FCD is common in neuropsychological practice. It is characterized by cognitive symptoms that are not better explained by another medical or psychiatric disorder. The cognitive symptoms are associated with distress and/or limitations in daily functioning, but are potentially reversible with appropriate identification and treatment. Historically, a variety of diagnostic frameworks have attempted to capture this condition. A contemporary conceptualization of FCD positions it as a subtype of Functional Neurological Disorder, with shared and unique etiological factors. Patients with FCD tend to perform normally on neuropsychological testing or demonstrate relatively weak memory acquisition (e.g. list learning trials) in comparison to strong attention and delayed recall performance. Careful history-taking and behavioral observations are essential to support the diagnosis of FCD. Areas of ongoing controversy include operationalizing "internal inconsistencies" and the role of performance validity testing. Evidence for targeted interventions remains scarce. Conclusions: Neuropsychologists familiar with FCD can uniquely contribute to the care of patients with this condition by improving diagnostic clarity, richening case formulation, communicating effectively with referrers, and leading clinical management. Further research is needed to refine diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The objective of the current investigation was to validate and establish the psychometric properties of an abbreviated, 10-item version of the Word Choice Test (WCT). Method: Data from one hundred ten clinically-referred participants (M age = 55.92, SD = 14.07; M education = 13.74, SD = 2.43; 84.5% Male) in a Veterans Affairs neuropsychology outpatient clinic was analyzed. All participants completed the WCT, the TOMM T1, the WMT, and the Digit Span subtest of the WAIS-IV as part of a larger battery of neuropsychological tests. Results: Correlation analyses revealed significant relationships between the 10-item WCT-10, the TOMM T1, the RDS forward/backward, as well as the IR, DR, and CNS subtests of the WMT. ROC analysis for the WCT-10 indicated optimal cutoff of 2 or more errors, with 52% sensitivity and 97% specificity (AUC=.786, p<.001), compared with the standard administration of the WCT with a cutoff of 8 or more errors, which had 67% sensitivity and 91% specificity. Specificity/sensitivity values remained adequate at a cutoff of two or more errors when participants with cognitive impairment (Sensitivity=.52, Specificity=.92) and without cognitive impairment (Sensitivity=.52, Specificity = 1.0) were examined separately. Conclusions: The present investigation revealed that the WCT-10, an abbreviated free-standing PVT comprised of the initial 10 items of the WCT, demonstrated clinical utility in a mixed clinical sample of Veterans and was robust to cognitive impairment. This abbreviated PVT may benefit researchers and clinicians through adequate identification of invalid performance while minimizing completion time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Performance Validity Tests (PVTs) have been used to identify non-credible performance in clinical, medicolegal, forensic, and, more recently, academic settings. The inclusion of PVTs when administering psychoeducational assessments is essential given that specific accommodation such as flexible deadlines and increased writing time can provide an external incentive for students without disabilities to feign symptoms. Method: The present study used archival data to establish base rates of non-credible performance in a sample of post-secondary students (n = 1045) who underwent a comprehensive psychoeducational evaluation for the purposes of obtaining academic accommodations. In accordance with current guidelines, non-credible performance was determined by failure on two or more freestanding or embedded PVTs. Results: 9.4% of participants failed at least two of the PVTs they were administered, of which 8.5% failed two PVTs, and approximately 1% failed three PVTs. Base rates of failure for specific PVTs ranged from 25% (b Test) to 11.2% (TOVA). Conclusions: The present study found a lower base rate of non-credible performance than previously observed in comparable populations. This likely reflects the utilization of conservative criteria in detecting non-credible performance to avoid false positives. By contrast, inconsistent base rates previously found in the literature may reflect inconsistent methodologies. These results further emphasize the importance of administering multiple PVTs during psychoeducational assessments. The implications of these findings can further inform clinicians administering assessments in academic settings and aid in the appropriate utilization of PVTs in psychoeducational evaluation to determine accessibility accommodations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The present study was the first to investigate the test performance and symptom reports of individuals who engage in both over-reporting (i.e., exaggerating or fabricating symptoms) and under-reporting (i.e., exaggerating positive qualities or denying shortcomings) in the context of a forensic evaluation. We focused on comparing individuals who over- and under-reported (OR + UR) with those who only over-reported (OR-only) on the MMPI-3. Method: Using a disability claimant sample referred for comprehensive psychological evaluations (n = 848), the present study first determined the rates of possible over-reporting (MMPI-3 F ≥ 75 T, Fp ≥ 70 T, Fs ≥ 100 T, or FBS or RBS ≥ 90 T) with (n = 42) and without (n = 332) under-reporting (L ≥ 65 T). Next, we examined group mean differences on MMPI-3 substantive scale scores and scores on several additional measures completed by the disability claimant sample during their evaluation. Results: The small group of individuals identified as both over-reporting and under-reporting (OR + UR) scored meaningfully higher than the OR-only group on several over- and under-reporting symptom validity tests, as well as on measures of emotional and cognitive/somatic complaints, but lower on externalizing measures. The OR + UR group also performed significantly worse than the OR-only group on several performance validity tests and measures of cognitive ability. Conclusions: The present study indicated that disability claimants who engage in simultaneous over- and under-reporting portray themselves as having greater levels of dysfunction but fewer externalizing tendencies relative to claimants who only over-report; however, these portrayals are likely less accurate reflections of their true functioning. [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]

This study aims to develop a simplified Chinese version of the "Memory for Intentions Test" (MIST), evaluate its reliability and concurrent validity, explore the inter-relationships among the MIST variables and the relationships between the MIST variables and socio-demographic factors. Two hundred healthy, Chinese-speaking adults of the Han community participated in this study. Form A of the Chinese MIST and two prospective items of the Rivermead Behavioural Memory Test, Second Edition (RBMT-II, Chinese version) were administered to all participants to evaluate internal consistency, split-half reliability, and concurrent validity. Twenty of these participants were assessed twice on Form A with a two-week interval to examine test-retest reliability. They were also assessed on both Form A and Form B to examine alternate-form reliability. The findings of the study indicated good internal consistency (Cronbach's α =.833) and excellent split-half reliability (r =.924–.930) among the six subscales of the Chinese MIST, although the internal consistency was low (Cronbach's α =.129) for individual PM trials. We also found adequate concurrent validity (ρ =.722, p<.001), test-retest reliability (ρ =.716, p <.001), and alternate-form reliability (ρ=.828, p <.001). The Chinese MIST demonstrated suitable reliability and concurrent validity in the Chinese-speaking population. The present study provides a new standardized prospective memory test for the Chinese population, which would enhance future clinical research in this field on the Chinese mainland. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The clock drawing test (CDT) is a widely used cognitive screening test. However, CDT performance is affected by education. This study examined an alternative, the Papadum test, designed for people with low levels of education/literacy. The association between education and test performance, correlation between CDT and Papadum test, and diagnostic accuracy of both CDT and Papadum tests were examined. Method: 89 healthy literate adults and 59 literate adults (all Bengali speaking) with a diagnosis of mild-moderate dementia from hospitals in Kolkata, India undertook the CDT and the Papadum test. Results: Education had a significant association with the CDT but not with the Papadum test. Across the whole sample there was a significant correlation between CDT and Papadum, but not within separate groups of healthy controls and patients. Diagnostic accuracy for the Papadum test was similar to that for CDT. Conclusions: Results highlight the strong influence that education has on CDT performance indicating that it is not suitable for those with low levels of literacy. The Papadum test could provide a viable alternative as a screening tool to the CDT for use with people who are illiterate or have low levels of education. Further validation studies are required. [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]

Objective: This study presents data on the time cost and associated charges for common performance validity tests (PVTs). It also applies an approach from cost effectiveness research to comparison of tests that incorporates cost and classification accuracy. Method: A recent test usage survey was used to identify PVTs in common use among adult neuropsychologists. Data on test administration and scoring time were aggregated. Charges per test were calculated. A cost effectiveness approach was applied to compare pairs of tests from three studies using data on test administration time and classification accuracy operationalized as improvement in posterior probability beyond base rate. Charges per unit increase in posterior probability over base rate were calculated for base rates of invalidity ranging from 10 to 40%. Results: Ten commonly used PVTs measures showed a wide range in test administration and scoring time from 1 to 3 minutes to over 40 minutes with associated charge estimates from $4 to $284. Cost effectiveness comparisons illustrated the nuance in test selection and benefit of considering cost in relation to outcome rather than prioritizing time (i.e. cost minimization) classification accuracy alone. Conclusions: Findings extend recent research efforts to fill knowledge gaps related to the cost of neuropsychological evaluation. The cost effectiveness approach warrants further study in other samples with different neuropsychological and outcome measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study examined disability-related factors as predictors of PVT performance in Veterans who underwent neuropsychological evaluation for clinical purposes, not for determination of disability benefits. Method: Participants were 1,438 Veterans who were seen for clinical evaluation in a VA Medical Center's Neuropsychology Clinic. All were administered the TOMM, MSVT, or both. Predictors of PVT performance included (1) whether Veterans were receiving VA disability benefits ("service connection") for psychiatric or neurological conditions at the time of evaluation, and (2) whether Veterans reported on clinical interview that they were in the process of applying for disability benefits. Data were analyzed using binary logistic regression, with PVT performance as the dependent variable in separate analyses for the TOMM and MSVT. Results: Veterans who were already receiving VA disability benefits for psychiatric or neurological conditions were significantly more likely to fail both the TOMM and the MSVT, compared to Veterans who were not receiving benefits for such conditions. Independently of receiving such benefits, Veterans who reported that they were applying for disability benefits were significantly more likely to fail the TOMM and MSVT than were Veterans who denied applying for benefits at the time of evaluation. Conclusions: These findings demonstrate that simply being in the process of applying for disability benefits increases the likelihood of noncredible performance. The presence of external incentives can predict the validity of neuropsychological performance even in clinical, non-forensic settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives of the current study were to cross validate the Pain Disability Index (PDI) as a measure of symptom validity in a large sample of mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI) litigants with persistent post-concussive pain complaints, and investigate the effects of performance and symptom validity testing on PDI scores. Participants included 91 adults who underwent a comprehensive neuropsychological examination. Criterion groups were formed based upon their performance on stand-alone measures of cognitive performance validity (PVT), and the MMPI-2-RF Symptom Validity Scale (FBS-r) as a measure of symptom validity (SVT). Participants who failed PVT and SVT scored significantly higher on the PDI compared to participants who passed both. Failing both was associated with a large effect size. Failing PVT, but passing SVT, was associated with a medium effect on PDI scores, while passing PVT, but failing SVT demonstrated a small effect. A PDI cutscore of 49 was associated with.90 specificity and.47 sensitivity. The PDI demonstrates external validity as a self-report measure of symptom validity in MTBI litigants with persistent post-concussive pain complaints. A dose response relationship exists between PVT, SVT and PDI scores. Forensic examiners should include both PVT and SVT to optimize clinical decision making when evaluating MTBI litigants with complaints of pain-related disability years post-incident. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examined the efficacy of CVLT-3 response bias (i.e., parametric and nonparametric response bias) indices in differentiating between a clinical sample with traumatic brain injury and a litigating sample with poor performance validity. Participants included 106 individuals, divided into two groups: clinical group with TBI (n = 56) and a litigating group who demonstrated inadequate performance validity (n = 50), as measured by failure on at least two performance validity tests. Archival CVLT-II data was rescored utilizing the CVLT-3 scoring and normative data. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to evaluate the diagnostic discriminability of the two response bias indices. Both parametric and nonparametric bias indices showed acceptable levels of diagnostic discrimination: AUC =.791 for parametric response bias and AUC =.753 for nonparametric response bias. Parametric response bias' discrimination was statistically superior to the nonparametric responses bias' discrimination. The CVLT-3 response bias score demonstrated good sensitivity and specificity when differentiating between individuals in a clinical sample with TBI and individuals in litigation who demonstrated inadequate performance validity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Response distortions in the reporting of postconcussion symptoms can occur for many reasons. The Rivermead Post-concussion Symptoms Questionnaire (RPQ) was recently modified to include an embedded symptom validity indicator to test for atypical symptoms. The present study used a simulation design to investigate the psychometric properties of the modified RPQ (mRPQ). 298 adult volunteers were randomised into three groups: honest responding (Controls, C) who reported actual, current symptoms; mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) simulators (MS) who role played being injured, and; biased mTBI simulators (BMS) who role played being injured and were asked to bias (exaggerate) their response. The MS and BMS participants received instructions to support the simulation. All participants completed the mRPQ and a modified Neurobehavioral Symptom Inventory (mNSI). A 2 × 3 mixed ANOVA with one within-group variable (Symptom type: Standard or Atypical) and one between-group variable (Instruction type: C, MS, BMS) found a significant two-way interaction (p <.05, ηp2 =.08). The BMS group had score elevations for both standard and atypical postconcussion symptoms; therefore, both symptom types should be considered when evaluating for biased responding. The mRPQ has promising psychometric properties and should be further developed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: We examined the frequency of possible invalid test scores on the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders, and whether there was an association between scores on the embedded RBANS performance validity tests (PVTs) and self-reported symptoms of apathy as measured by the Initiate Scale of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Adult Version (BRIEF-A). Methods: Participants included 250 patients (M = 24.4 years-old, SD = 5.7) with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. Base rates of RBANS Effort Index (EI), Effort Scale (ES), and Performance Validity Index (PVI) test scores were computed. Spearman correlations were used to examine the associations between the RBANS PVTs, the RBANS Index scores, and the BRIEF-A Initiate Scale. Regression analyses were used to investigate how well the RBANS PVTs predicted scores on the BRIEF-A Initiate Scale. Results: The frequency of invalid scores on the EI (>3) and the PVI (<42) in participants with schizophrenia spectrum disorders was 6%. The frequency of invalid ES scores (<12) was 28% in the patients compared to 15% in the U.S. standardization sample. There was a small significant correlation between the EI and the BRIEF-A Initiate Scale (rho=.158, p<.05). Conclusions: The rates of invalid scores were similar to previously published studies. Invalid scores on the BRIEF-A were uncommon. Apathy measured with the BRIEF-A Initiate Scale was not associated with performance on the RBANS validity measures or with measures of cognition. [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]

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]

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]

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 exploratory study examined the classification accuracy of three derived scales aimed at detecting cognitive response bias in neuropsychological samples. The derived scales are composed of existing scales from the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI). A mixed clinical sample of consecutive outpatients referred for neuropsychological assessment at a large Midwestern academic medical center was utilized. Participants and Methods: Participants included 332 patients who completed study's embedded and free-standing performance validity tests (PVTs) and the PAI. PASS and FAIL groups were created based on PVT performance to evaluate the classification accuracy of the derived scales. Three new scales, Cognitive Bias Scale of Scales 1–3, (CB-SOS1-3) were derived by combining existing scales by either summing the scales together and dividing by the total number of scales summed, or by logistically deriving a variable from the contributions of several scales. Results: All of the newly derived scales significantly differentiated between PASS and FAIL groups. All of the derived SOS scales demonstrated acceptable classification accuracy (i.e. CB-SOS1 AUC = 0.72; CB-SOS2 AUC = 0.73; CB-SOS3 AUC = 0.75). Conclusions: This exploratory study demonstrates that attending to scale-level PAI data may be a promising area of research in improving prediction of PVT failure. [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: Social Security Disability is a common external incentive in neuropsychological evaluations. This study determined base rates of invalidity when patients referred for routine clinical evaluations have Social Security Disability as an external incentive. Method: Patients (n = 242) were grouped as validly or invalidly performing based on the use of multiple performance validity tests. Frequency analyses were then conducted. Results: As a whole, 46.0% of clinically referred patients with Social Security Disability as an external incentive produced invalid data. When divided by disability pursuit status, 58.6% of individuals already receiving Social Security Disability, 44.6% of individuals actively seeking Social Security Disability, and 39.3% of individuals considering seeking Social Security Disability produced invalid data. By comparison, only 8.5% of clinically referred patients without known external incentives produced invalid data. Conclusions: Beyond establishing base rates, these data indicate that the external incentive, not necessarily the evaluation setting, increases the rate of invalidity, as obtained base rates mirror those observed in independent medical examinations. In addition, this study highlights that even patients who report that they are considering but have not committed themselves to pursuing an external incentive frequently invalidate testing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study is a cross-validation of the Cognitive Bias Scale (CBS) from the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI), a ten-item scale designed to assess symptom endorsement associated with performance validity test failure in neuropsychological samples. The study utilized a mixed neuropsychological sample of consecutively referred patients at a large academic medical center in the Midwest. Participants and Methods: Participants were 332 patients who completed embedded and free-standing performance validity tests (PVTs) and the PAI. Pass and fail groups were created based on PVT performance to evaluate classification accuracy of the CBS. Results: The results were generally consistent with the initial study for overall classification accuracy, sensitivity, and cut-off score. Consistent with the validation study, CBS had better classification accuracy than the original PAI validity scales and a comparable effect size to that obtained in the original validation publication; however, the Somatic Complaints scale (SOM) and the Conversion subscale (SOM-C) also demonstrated good classification accuracy. The CBS had incremental predictive ability compared to existing PAI scales. Conclusions: The results supported the CBS, but further research is needed on specific populations. Findings from this present study also suggest the relationship between conversion tendencies and PVT failure may be stronger in some geographic locations or population types (forensic versus clinical patients). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective The Verbal Naming Test (VNT) assesses word-finding ability, or naming, through the use of a naming-to-definition paradigm and has been shown to effectively detect naming deficits in older adults. This study evaluated the convergent and discriminant validity of the VNT, assessed how well it detects Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI), and provided descriptive data stratified by three levels of age (60–69, 70–79, 80–89). Method The sample included 151 healthy older Veterans who were found to be cognitively intact and free of neurological and acute psychiatric disorders (mean age = 74.23, SD = 6.67; range: 60–89) and 39 older Veterans with MCI (mean age = 72.97, SD = 8.24; range 60-88). Correlations were calculated between the VNT, Boston Naming Test (BNT), and several other neuropsychological measures. ROC analyses determined how well the VNT detected MCI. Results The VNT correlated with the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test and the Logical Memory test. The BNT did not correlate with any measure with the exception of Judgment of Line Orientation (JLO). The Area Under the Curve (AUC) for the detection of MCI was 0.69. Normative data for the VNT are presented and stratified by ages. Conclusions This study provides evidence of the convergent and discriminant validity of the Verbal Naming Test in a sample of cognitively normal older adults, as well as its validity in the detection of MCI. It also provides descriptive data on the Verbal Naming Test that can be used in the neuropsychological assessment of older adults. [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]

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 aim of this investigation was to provide information about the utility of the newly revised and renormed Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-3 (MMPI-3) over-reporting scales in a forensic disability sample. Method: Participants consisted of 550 non-head injury disability-related referrals (i.e. 95.6% for worker's compensation) and were primarily diagnosed with an adjustment disorder, depressive disorder, or posttraumatic stress disorder. Criterion measures included performance validity indicators and non-MMPI symptom validity indicators. Results: Correlation analyses showed that validity scale F was most strongly associated with non-MMPI symptom validity indicators, whereas F, Fs, FBS, and RBS were comparable to each other in their associations with performance validity indicators. Group mean comparisons between Pass versus Fail PVT groups showed that RBS consistently yielded the largest effect sizes. Using established structured criteria for Malingered Neurocognitive Dysfunction (MND), additional group mean comparisons showed that RBS, followed by Fs, F, and FBS, performed well in differentiating genuine responders from MND examinees. Classification accuracy estimates indicated that the MMPI-3 over-reporting scales performed well in the prediction of Probable/Definite MND and, as expected, to a lesser degree of Possible MND. Conclusions: Practical applications, study limitations, and directions for future research are discussed. The overall findings from this study provide empirical support for the utility of the MMPI-3 over-reporting scales in detecting negative response bias in forensic disability evaluations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The purpose of this paper is to determine whether negative validity test findings should be used in the Bayesian aggregate along with positive test findings for the determination of malingering as the condition of interest (COI). Method: Evidence-based diagnostic methods for conditions in neuropsychology and medicine were reviewed for comparison with their use in cases of malingering. Logical and Bayesian analyses of these cases were applied. A case study showed that negative validity test findings did not indicate "good effort". Results: Deception about illness is fundamentally different from other constructs/diseases in evidence-based medicine and neuropsychology. This is because deception involves a deliberate process that may involve coaching, claimant research, and/or focusing the deception on one aspect (e.g., slowness) as opposed to other neurocognitive problems (e.g., memory). Comparatively, other conditions in medicine and neuropsychology are unlikely to be manipulated by the patient. Conclusions: The assertion by Frederick (2015) and Black, Necrason, and Omasta (2016) that both positive and negative validity test findings must be used together in the aggregate does not stand up to this comparative scrutiny. The fundamental assumption by these authors that a negative test finding concerning malingering represents "good effort" is flawed; it simply represents lack of evidence of malingering, which cannot be construed as evidence of lack of malingering. We recommend that in forensic determination of malingering, negative validity test findings should not be used in a Bayesian aggregation. This conclusion is consistent with current practices in the field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective:Our purpose was to determine whether Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT) profiles could differentiate performance invalidity from true impairment in patients with varying levels of memory impairment and functional ability being evaluated for Alzheimer's disease (AD). Method: Seventy-three older adults (13 healthy controls, 25 mild cognitive impairment [MCI], 16 mild AD, 19 moderate AD) were evaluated with a neuropsychological battery including the MSVT and activities of daily living (ADL) measures. Using MSVT classification guidelines, examinees' MSVT profiles were categorized as: 1) valid, 2) invalid, 3) weak memory, or 4) genuine memory impairment (GMIP). Results: Eighty-four percent of moderate AD examinees produced a GMIP. Among MCI and mild AD examinees, who had only modestly affected ADLs, a substantial proportion manifested a GMIP (40% and 62.5%, respectively). An invalid profile was uncommon across patient groups (12.5% in mild AD, 5.3% in moderate AD, and 0% in MCI). Conclusions: The MSVT functions reasonably well in a dementia sample to determine if an examinee has an invalid profile, although for mild AD examinees, the false positive rate is slightly above the recommended 10% cut-off. However, even individuals with MCI, mild AD and relative preservation of ADLs may manifest a GMIP, demonstrating that such profile is found across patients with lower and higher degrees of functional impairment. Given this finding, the usefulness of the GMIP in differentiating performance invalidity from true impairment in patients being evaluated for AD appears limited. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Clinical evaluation for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) not only requires assessment of symptoms, but also consideration of the degree to which symptoms lead to impairment within various functional domains. However, ADHD evaluations in adulthood often rely on self-reported functional impairment, which might be vulnerable to malingering/noncredible responding. The present study utilized a clinical sample/known groups design to examine the relationship of noncredible presentation to functional impairment ratings by analyzing differential associations with both symptom and performance validity tests (SVTs and PVTs). Method: Participants were 168 postsecondary students who completed psychoeducational assessments for ADHD to determine their eligibility for academic accommodations and/or medications. Impairment ratings on the Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale (WFIRS) of 71 students who presented in a noncredible fashion were compared to 72 students who appeared to present credibly (controls) and 25 students diagnosed with ADHD who appeared to present credibly (clinical controls). Results: Relative to both control groups, individuals who presented noncredibly reported higher levels of disability on most functional domains and a higher percentage provided responses that fell in the impaired range on all functional domains of the WFIRS. Conclusions: Findings provide additional evidence that ADHD-related functional impairment ratings are susceptible to noncredible presentation and highlight the need for assessors to include both SVTs and PVTs in ADHD evaluations. [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]

Prior research has identified a variety of embedded performance validity indicators on the Conners' Continuous Performance Test-II (CPT-II). The purpose of this study was to examine embedded validity indicators within the updated third edition of the Conners Continuous Performance Test (CPT-3). This study used a retrospective chart review from an ADHD evaluation clinic at a Mid-Atlantic VA hospital. Participants were 197 military veterans who completed a clinical assessment for ADHD. All participants were consecutive referrals to the ADHD clinic who completed the CPT-3 and the Test of Memory Malingering, Trial 1 (TOMM1). Logistic regression analyses indicated that the following five variables were able to significantly predict validity status on the TOMM1: detectability (d'), omissions (OMI), commissions (COM), hit reaction time (HRT) standard deviation (SD), and HRT inter-stimulus interval (ISI) change. Among these measures, HRT SD and HRT ISI change were identified as the scores with the highest AUC values. Optimal cutoffs for all significant predictors were identified. A number of composite EVIs were created using various combinations of CPT-3 scores. All composite EVIs significantly differentiated between pass and fail status on the TOMM1. Several CPT-3 variables have clinical utility as embedded validity indicators; however, due to low sensitivity, they should not be used in isolation. These scores may be used as indicators of invalid performance but should not be used to rule out invalid performance. Identified CPT-3 scores may be useful as one component in a multivariate, multi-point continuous approach to performance validity sampling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Administration of performance validity tests (PVT) during neuropsychological assessments is standard practice, with the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) being a commonly used measure. The TOMM has been well validated in hearing populations with various medical and psychiatric backgrounds. A major gap in the literature is the use of the TOMM amongst culturally Deaf individuals who use American Sign Language (ASL) as their first and preferred language. The purpose of this study was to explore the use of the TOMM with this population to determine if there may be differences related to the use of semantic knowledge and recall using signs rather than spoken phonemes. This study recruited 30 culturally Deaf, community-dwelling adults, who self-reported that they were not involved in litigation ordisability claims. In addition to the TOMM, participants were screened for cognitive ability using non-verbal components of the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence, Second Edition (WASI-II) and the Mini Mental State Examination: ASL Version (MMSE:ASL). Nonverbal intelligence for this sample was within the average range of ability. No participants scored lower than the standard cut-off score for Trial 2 or the Retention Trial on the TOMM (≤44 raw score to indicate invalid responding). Trial 1 performances ranged from 44 to 50, Trial 2 performances ranged from 49 to 50, and Retention performances ranged from 49 to 50. These results support the use of the same standard cut-off scores established for hearing individuals in culturally Deaf individuals who use ASL. [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: The goal of this project was to explore the initial psychometric properties (construct and ecological validity) of self-administered online (SAO) neuropsychological assessment (using the platform), compared to traditional testing, in a clinical sample, as well as to evaluate participant acceptance. SAO assessment has the potential to expand the reach of in-person neuropsychological assessment approaches. Method: Counterbalanced, within-subjects design comparing SAO performance to in-person performance in adults with diabetes with and without Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD). Forty-nine participants completed both assessment modalities (type 1 diabetes N = 14, type 2 diabetes N = 35; CKD N = 18). Results: Associations between SAO and analogous in-person tests were adequate to good (r = 0.49-0.66). Association strength between divergent cognitive tests did not differ between SAO versus in-person tests. SAO testing was more strongly associated with age than in-person testing (age R2=0.54 versus 0.23), while prediction of education, HbA1c, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) did not differ significantly between test modalities (education R2=0.37 versus 0.30; HbA1c R2=0.20 versus 0.12; eGFR R2 = 0.41 versus 0.33). Associations with measures of everyday functioning were also similar (Functional Activities Questionnaire R2=0.08 versus 0.07; Neuro-QoL R2=0.14 versus 0.16; Diabetes Self-Management Questionnaire R2=0.19 versus 0.19). Conclusions: The selected SAO neuropsychological tests had acceptable construct validity (including divergent, convergent, and criterion-related validity), and similar ecological validity to that of traditional testing. These SAO assessments were acceptable to participants and appear appropriate for use in research applications, although further research is needed to better understand the strengths and weaknesses in other clinical populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Face-Name Associative Memory Exam (FNAME) has been used to detect subtle cognitive changes in clinically normal older adults at increased risk for Alzheimer's disease. FNAME assesses learning and delayed recall for face-name pairs. The aim of this study is to introduce a Latin American Spanish version of the FNAME (LAS-FNAME), examine its psychometric properties, and provide preliminary normative data in a sample of clinically normal, Spanish-speaking individuals from Antioquia, Colombia. 59 clinically-normal individuals (71% females) were recruited by the Grupo de Neurociencias in Antioquia (Colombia). Age ranged from 27 to 82 years (M = 50.31, SD = 15.32) and years of education ranged from 2 to 17 years (M = 9.02, SD = 4.11). All participants completed the LAS-FNAME and a brief neuropsychological evaluation. We examined associations between age, education, and sex and performance on the LAS-FNAME. Internal consistency, convergent and discriminant validity were also assessed. Test-restest reliability was computed for a subset of participants (n = 32). LAS-FNAME exhibited moderate convergent validity with other memory measures (Free and Cued Selective Reminding Scale, rs=.465, p<.01; Wechsler Memory Scale III - Logical Memory Delayed Recall, rs=.479, p<.01). The subscales of the LAS-FNAME exhibited adequate internal consistency (α=.825). Test-retest reliability analyses demonstrated consistency of scores over time. Normative data was stratified by age (<50, 50–65, >65) and low and high educational attainment (≤8 and >8 years of education, respectively). The LAS-FNAME is a valid and reliable measure to assess memory in clinically normal, Spanish-speaking individuals from Colombia for clinical and research purposes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To evaluate reliability and concurrent validity of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale - Cognitive Subscale, Chinese Version (ADAS-Cog-C) among Chinese community older adults. Three groups, comprising of 1,276 community-dwelling older adults, were included in this study: a normal control (NC), a mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and an Alzheimer's disease (AD) group. All participants were assessed through ADAS-Cog-C, clinical interviews, physical examinations, Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), and the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale (CDR). Internal consistency was assessed to evaluate the reliability of ADAS-Cog-C. Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated to evaluate the concurrent validity between ADAS-Cog-C, MMSE, and CDR. Overall, the Cronbach's alpha coefficients of ADAS-Cog-C for the AD and MCI groups were 0.843 and 0.554, respectively. The split-half reliability coefficients for the AD and MCI groups were 0.860 and 0.539, respectively. ADAS-Cog-C scores were negatively correlated with MMSE scores (r = −0.706, p < 0.001) and positively associated with CDR scores (r = 0.546, p < 0.001). After excluding the MCI group from the analysis, the internal consistency of ADAS-Cog-C for the total population improved (α = 0.813, rhh = 0.852, all p < 0.001), as did the correlation between ADAS-Cog-C and MMSE (r = −0.828, p < 0.001) and CDR (r = 0.429, all p < 0.001) scores. ADAS-Cog-C has good internal consistency and concurrent validity for assessing Chinese community older adults with AD, but poor consistency, good concurrent validity with the MMSE while moderate concurrent validity with the CDR for MCI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Noncredible symptom claims, regularly expected in forensic contexts, may also occur in clinical and rehabilitation referral contexts. Hidden motives and secondary gain expectations may play a significant role in clinical patients. We studied the prevalence of noncredible symptom report in patients treated for minor mental disorders in an inpatient setting. Method: Five hundred and thirty seven clinical inpatients of a psychosomatic rehabilitation center were studied (mean age: 50.2 years; native speakers of German). They were referred for treatment of depression, anxiety, somatoform disorder, adjustment disorder, and neurasthenia. Results of two symptom validity tests (Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology, SIMS; Self-Report Symptom Inventory, SRSI) and the Beck Depression Inventory–II (BDI–II) were analyzed. Results: At screening level, 34.5% and 29.8% of the patients were found to presumably overreport symptoms on the SIMS and SRSI, respectively. At the standard cut score of the SRSI (maximum false positive rate: 5%), the proportion of diagnosed overreporting was 18.8%. SIMS and SRSI pseudosymptom endorsement correlated at.73. Highly elevated depressive symptom claims with BDI–II scores above 40, found in 9.3% of the patients, were associated with elevated pseudosymptom endorsement. Moreover, extended times of sick leave and higher expectations of disability pension were associated with elevated pseudosymptom endorsement. Conclusions: The prevalence of symptom overreporting in some clinical patient groups is a serious, yet underinvestigated problem. The current estimates yielded a high prevalence of distorted, noncredible symptom claims in psychosomatic rehabilitation patients. The challenges arising to health professionals working in such settings are immense and need more consideration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Prior research has suggested that treatment-resistant psychosis (TRP) may be a categorically distinct subtype from treatment-responsive psychotic disorders. However, relatively few studies have investigated the cognitive profile of individuals with TRP. Moreover, no prior studies have investigated the effectiveness of using the NIH Toolbox Cognition Battery (NTCB) for assessing cognition among psychiatric inpatients despite its promising efficiency and practicality in such settings. The current study aimed to investigate the validity of the NTCB and the associated cognitive profile of inpatients with TRP. Methods: Participants (N = 38) were administered the NTCB and a neuropsychological test battery. The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale and the Routine Assessment of Patient Progress measured psychosis symptomatology and daily functioning, respectively. Results: Results showed deficits relative to normative values in fluid cognitive abilities using the NTCB, as predicted. There was strong convergent validity and adequate divergent validity between the NTCB subtests and corresponding neuropsychological measures, though no NTCB subtest correlated with performance on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Task. NTCB performance correlated with positive and disorganized symptoms of psychosis as well as daily functioning. Conclusions: Taken together, the NTCB appears to be a relatively strong tool for cognitive screening among psychiatric inpatients and may be used to identify which patients might benefit from further neuropsychological evaluation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The Verbal Naming Test (VNT) is a nonvisual measure of word finding with stimuli chosen based on rare frequency of usage in spoken English. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the VNT and test the feasibility of telephone administration. In addition, regression-based normative data were obtained for the VNT as well as other measures. Method: Eighty-one community-dwelling older adults 61–92 years old (mean = 74.19 years) completed the VNT, the Naming subtests of the Neuropsychological Assessment Battery (NAB), the WIAT-III Sentence Repetition subtest, and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Results: As evidence of construct validity, the VNT had large correlations with the NAB Naming test and medium correlations with the MoCA and WIAT-III Sentence Repetition test. Cronbach's alpha in this sample was 0.621. Age, education, and gender were entered into linear regression equations and regression-based normative equations are presented. Lastly, administration of the VNT over the telephone was found to be feasible. Conclusions: The VNT is a valid measure of naming among community-dwelling older adults. Regression-based normative data for the measure will enable its use in the neuropsychological assessment of naming with a wide range of older adults. [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 paper aims to develop diagnostic criteria for factitious disorder (FD) and a heuristic for research by creating standards for delineating criterion groups. Method: Both FD and malingering are conceptualized within a rubric of illness-deception. The history of FD research was compared to the research history on malingering. Differences in the measurement of these constructs were described. The potential utility of performance validity tests (PVTs) and symptom validity tests (SVTs) in FD is discussed in light of successful applications in malingering. Methods for obtaining evidence for FD are delineated in a table of diagnostic criteria. Results: The comparison of FD and malingering research shows that the scientific measurement of malingering evolved rapidly with the introduction of forced-choice validity testing and cogent guidelines for the formation of criterion groups. Likewise, PVTs and SVTs hold promise as methods of measuring deceptive behavior in FD. The most salient differences between FD and malingering are understood to be matter of context/setting: malingering occurs in an external incentive context, while FD occurs in a medical/psychological context. Guidelines to assess FD are developed to fill the need for known-groups research. Conclusions: Evidence for FD, a form of illness-deception, can be obtained by using validity testing, which, together with careful clinical observation, allows for the development of probabilistic diagnostic criteria. Similar to the other form of illness-deception – malingering – these criteria can be used to form known groups for research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The Boston Naming Test, Second Edition (BNT-2) and the Neuropsychological Assessment Battery (NAB) Naming Test are common measures to assess visual confrontation naming ability. The comparably newer NAB Naming Test is a potential alternative to the BNT-2, given the latter's history of criticism. A recent psychometric investigation of the NAB Naming Test demonstrated sufficient reliability and validity in a large clinical sample; however, their study was limited by a lack of ethnic, racial, and language diversity, all of which can impact scores on naming tests. Method: The present study examined convergent and discriminant validity and internal consistency of the NAB Naming Test in a diverse clinical sample comprised of 225 veterans (87.6% men, 51.1% White/Caucasian, 29.3% bilingual, 64.0% with cognitive impairment). All but three participants identified as White/Caucasian, Hispanic/Latino or Black/African American. These psychometric properties were examined for the overall sample and for monolingual (English) and bilingual (English/Spanish) participants separately. Results: As expected, the NAB Naming Test demonstrated sufficient internal consistency and a negatively skewed distribution for the overall sample and monolingual and bilingual participants. Evidence for adequate convergent and discriminative validity was also established for monolingual and bilingual participants separately. Conclusion: In a diverse clinical sample with differing levels of self-reported language status, the NAB Naming Test demonstrated adequate psychometric properties. Although it represents a viable option in neuropsychological practice, continued awareness of patient-specific factors that could impact performance is recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Apathy is a prominent syndrome across neurodegenerative diseases. The Dimensional Apathy Scale (DAS) assesses three apathy subtypes—executive, emotional, and initiation—and is sensitive and valid in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), Alzheimer's disease (AD), and Parkinson's disease. This study describes the development of the brief DAS (b-DAS), which will enable apathy to be swiftly detected in the clinic. Method: 102 ALS and 102 AD patients' previously collected data were used. Mokken analyses were performed on item-level data of each informant/carer-rated DAS subscale (executive, emotional, and initiation) for the initial scale reduction. Item-total correlational analyses against standard apathy (convergent validity criteria) and depression (divergent validity criteria) measures and qualitative examination of items aided final item selection. Receiver operating curve analysis determined optimal cutoffs for the reduced subscales. Results: Mokken analyses suggested unidimensionality of each DAS subscale. Three items were removed that failed to satisfy monotone homogeneity model requirements, three items were removed due to validity criteria not being met, and six items were removed due to a combination of lower item scalability and item-total correlations. Item-theme examination further reduced the b-DAS to nine items, three per subscale, with a supplemental awareness deficit assessment being added. Sensitivity- and specificity-based optimal cutoffs were calculated for each b-DAS subscale. Conclusions: This study presents the b-DAS, an informant/carer-based robust yet short multidimensional apathy instrument with good convergent and divergent validity, with recommended clinical cutoffs. The b-DAS is appropriate for use in the clinic and for research to quickly and comprehensively screen for apathy subtype impairments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the field of clinical neuropsychology, research on performance and symptom validity testing (PVT/SVT) spans over 4 decades. The figure illustrates the number of neuropsychology-relevant publications (i.e., with the word "neuropsycholog*" appearing anywhere in text) that focus on PVT/SVT issues across all peer-reviewed journals catalogued in the PsycINFO and MEDLINE databases. I The Clinical Neuropsychologist (TCN) i has been an important outlet for PVT/SVT researchers, publishing approximately 20% of PVT/SVT articles across all peer-reviewed journals SP 1 sp since its inception in 1987 (see Figure 2). To acknowledged I TCN i 's continued role in serving as an outlet for PVT/SVT research, as well as to highlight the current research trends, I TCN i has bundled 11 recent PVT/SVT submissions into this special issue.[2]. [Extracted from the article]

Objective: Electrical injury (EI) is a distinct subtype of traumatic injury that often results in a unique constellation of cognitive sequelae and unusual sensory experiences due to peripheral nervous system injury that are uncommon in general medical/neurological populations and have been unexplored with the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF). Method: This study examined performance patterns on MMPI-2-RF validity and substantive scales among 62 EI patients who underwent neuropsychological evaluation, of which 46 demonstrated valid symptom reporting and neurocognitive test performance via multiple independent validity indicators and were retained for analysis. Results: Valid EI patients scored significantly higher than the MMPI-2-RF normative sample on several validity scales with the largest effect sizes on F-r (Infrequent Responses), Fs (Infrequent Somatic Responses), FBS-r (Symptom Validity), and RBS (Response Bias), and ≥33% obtaining elevated scores on these scales per standard interpretive criteria. Review of item content on these scales revealed several reflect disturbances in sensation, physical functioning, and/or cognition that are not infrequent in this population. Further, MMPI-2-RF clinical profiles did not reveal generalized distress or noncredible over-reporting. Rather, similar to the MMPI-2, valid EI patients had a specific pattern related to physical/sensory symptoms and reduced positive emotions with elevations on restructured clinical (RC) scale 1 (somatic complaints), somatic/cognitive specific problem scales, and low positive emotions (RC2). Conclusions: Elevations on some MMPI-2-RF validity scale may capture some degree of actual EI sequela that neuropsychologists need to consider to prevent erroneously concluding that a credible EI patient is over-reporting when s/he is reporting bona fide, EI-related symptoms. [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 assessment is a crucial component of any neuropsychological evaluation, particularly in settings where potential exaggeration of complaints and deficits is heightened. Standalone performance validity measures can be time-consuming, so many investigations have explored embedded indices within existing measures. The Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) and the Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test (ROCF) each have a number of available embedded performance validity tests (PVTs). This investigation sought to evaluate several of these indices and to identify the most effective within a VA mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI)/Polytrauma sample. Method: A sample of 100 U.S. military veterans underwent clinical neuropsychological evaluation. There were 37 individuals whose test results were considered invalid based on failure of 2 or more independent PVTs, 47 whose results were valid, and 16 whose results were equivocal (failure on one PVT). The classification accuracies of published PVTs from the RAVLT and ROCF were evaluated. Results: Several indices had sensitivity values above 50% and strong positive predictive power with specificity held over 90%. Conclusions: The results demonstrated that there are multiple effective RAVLT & ROCF PVTs available for use in mTBI evaluations with veterans. [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]