Search

The purpose of this study was to evaluate multiple embedded performance validity indicators within the Digits Forward and Digits Backward subtests of the Neuropsychological Assessment Battery (NAB), including Reliable Digit Span (RDS), as no published papers have examined embedded digit span validity indicators within these subtests of the NAB. Retrospective archival chart review was conducted at an outpatient neuropsychology clinic. Participants were 92 adults (ages 19−68) who completed NAB Digits Forward and Digits Backward, and the Word Choice Test (WCT). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, t-tests, and sensitivity and specificity analyses were conducted. Analyses showed that RDS demonstrated acceptable classification accuracy between those who passed the WCT and those who did not. The area under the curve (AUC) value for RDS was 0.702; however, AUC values for all other digit span indices were unacceptably low. The optimal cutoff for RDS was identified (<8). RDS for the NAB appears to be an adequate indicator of performance validity; however, considering the very small number of participants who were invalid on the WCT (n = 15), as well as the utilization of only one stand-alone PVT to classify validity status, these findings are preliminary and in need of replication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective The purpose of this study was to develop and validate an embedded measure of performance validity within the Neuropsychological Assessment Battery (NAB). Method This study involved a retrospective chart review at an outpatient neuropsychology clinic. Participants were 183 adults (ages 18–70) who completed the attention and memory modules of the NAB, as well as the Word Choice Test, Green's Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT), and Green's Non-Verbal MSVT, as part of a clinical neuropsychological assessment (n  = 147) or as part of a forensic neuropsychological evaluation (n  = 36). Replicating methodology utilized by Silverberg et al. (2007) for the development of the Effort Index within the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status, an Embedded Validity Indictor (EVI) for the NAB was developed in the present study based on Digits Forward and List Learning Long Delayed Forced-Choice Recognition (list recognition) subtests. Results Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses indicated the newly developed NAB EVI was able to significantly differentiate between valid and invalid status on stand-alone performance-validity tests, with area under the curve values ranging from 0.797 to 0.977. Optimal cutoffs for medical, forensic, and mixed samples were identified. Conclusions The newly developed NAB EVI shows promise as an embedded performance validity measure; however, due to moderate sensitivity, it should be used in combination with stand-alone performance validity tests to detect invalid performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Neuropsychological literature has demonstrated a significant relationship between cognitive decline and functional capacity, but the directionality of this relationship is still not well understood. Further, the construct of practical judgment has been linked to both cognitive impairment and functional capacity, but these associations are still under-researched. Moreover, few studies to date have examined the relationships among all three constructs utilizing performance-based, ecologically valid and psychometrically sound measures. The present study aimed to address this gap in published literature and investigated whether a practical judgment and functional capacity can help differentiate individuals with cognitive dysfunction from those without. Participants were 270 community-dwelling individuals aged 56-95 years referred for neuropsychological evaluation in an outpatient setting. Bivariate correlations revealed moderate to strong relationships among the three studied variables. Additionally, logistic regression analysis indicated that ability to make sound practical judgments and ability to perform instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) can be used as indicators of cognitive impairment. The clinical implications of these findings are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective Performance validity research has emphasized the need for briefer measures and, more recently, abbreviated versions of established free-standing tests to minimize neuropsychological evaluation costs/time burden. This study examined the accuracy of multiple abbreviated versions of the Dot Counting Test ("quick" DCT) for detecting invalid performance in isolation and in combination with the Test of Memory Malingering Trial 1 (TOMMT1). Method Data from a mixed clinical sample of 107 veterans (80 valid/27 invalid per independent validity measures and structured criteria) were included in this cross-sectional study; 47% of valid participants were cognitively impaired. Sensitivities/specificities of various 6- and 4-card DCT combinations were calculated and compared to the full, 12-card DCT. Combined models with the most accurate 6- and 4-card combinations and TOMMT1 were then examined. Results Receiver operator characteristic curve analyses were significant for all 6- and 4-card DCT combinations with areas under the curve of.868–.897. The best 6-card combination (cards, 1-3-5-8-11-12) had 56% sensitivity/90% specificity (E-score cut-off, ≥14.5), and the best 4-card combination (cards, 3-4-8-11) had 63% sensitivity/94% specificity (cut-off, ≥16.75). The full DCT had 70% sensitivity/90% specificity (cut-off, ≥16.00). Logistic regression revealed 95% classification accuracy when 6-card or 4-card "quick" combinations were combined with TOMMT1, with the DCT combinations and TOMMT1 both emerging as significant predictors. Conclusions Abbreviated DCT versions utilizing 6- and 4-card combinations yielded comparable sensitivity/specificity as the full DCT. When these "quick" DCT combinations were further combined with an abbreviated memory-based performance validity test (i.e. TOMMT1), overall classification accuracy for identifying invalid performance was 95%. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Current standards of practice in neuropsychology advocate for including validity tests (PVTs). Abbreviating PVTs, such as the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM), may help reduce overall evaluation time while maintaining diagnostic accuracy. TOMM Trial 1 performance (T1), as well as the number of errors within the first 10 items of Trial 1 (TOMMe10), have shown initial promise as abbreviated PVTs but require additional external cross-validation. This study sought to replicate findings from other mixed, diverse, clinical samples and provide further validation of abbreviated administrations of the TOMM. Data included 120 veterans who completed the TOMM and 3 criterion PVTs during clinical evaluation. In total, performance from 68% of the sample was classified as valid (52% met criteria for cognitive impairment), and performance from 32% of the sample was invalid. Group differences, diagnostic accuracy statistics, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were analyzed for relevant TOMM indices. There were large (η²p= .45-.66), significant differences between validity groups (p < .001) on TOMM T1 and TOMMe10, with lower TOMM T1 and higher TOMMe10 scores for participants with invalid performance. Using established cut-scores, sensitivities/specificities were: TOMMe10 ≥1 error: .84/.66; ≥2 errors: .74/.93; TOMM T1 ≤40: .82/.93. ROC curve analysis yielded significant areas under the curve for both TOMMe10 and T1 with respective optimal cut-scores of ≥2 errors (.74 sensitivity/.93 specificity) and ≤41 (.84 sensitivity/.91 specificity). TOMMe10 and T1 performances are minimally impacted by cognitive impairment. Although both evidenced robust psychometric properties, TOMM T1 continued to show greater accuracy than TOMMe10. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]