Search

Objective: Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are associated with a range of negative health outcomes, including attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and neurocognitive deficits. This study identified symptom profiles in adult patients undergoing neuropsychological evaluations for ADHD and examined the association between these profiles and ACEs., Methods: Utilizing unsupervised machine learning models, the study analyzed data from 208 adult patients., Results: The Gaussian Mixture Model revealed two distinct symptom profiles: "Severely Impaired" and "Moderately Impaired". The "Severely Impaired" profile, 23.6% of the sample, was characterized by more severe ADHD symptomatology in childhood and worse neurocognitive performance. The "Moderately Impaired" profile, 76.4% of the sample, had scores in the average range for self-reported internalizing and externalizing psychopathology and better neurocognitive performance. There was a greater number of ACEs reported by patients in the Severely Impaired profile than the Moderately Impaired profile (p = .022). Specifically, using an ACEs cutoff of ≥4, 53.1% of patients in the Severely Impaired profile reported four or more ACEs, compared with 34.6% in the Moderately Impaired profile (p = .020). Profiles were not related to clinician-ascribed diagnosis., Conclusions: Findings underscore the association between ACEs and worse symptom profiles marked by impaired neurocognitive function, increased internalizing and externalizing psychopathology, and heightened perceived stress in adults with ADHD. Future research may explore the effect of ACEs on symptom profiles in diverse populations and potential moderators or mediators of these associations. Findings offers valuable insights for clinicians in their assessment and treatment planning., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background and Objectives: Moyamoya disease (MMD) is a rare noninflammatory disorder involving progressive intracranial vasculopathy and impaired cerebral blood flow in the anterior circulation, resulting in stroke and cognitive impairment. We aimed to characterize cognitive impairment and the possible predictive value of sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of adults with MMD., Methods: This cross-sectional study examined neurocognitive performance in a group of 42 consecutive adult patients (mean age = 40.52 years; 69% female) referred for a presurgical neuropsychological evaluation. Neuropsychological functioning was assessed with a comprehensive battery, and cognitive dysfunction was defined as 1.5 SDs below the mean. Neurocognitive performance correlated with clinical/demographic characteristics and disease markers., Results: Most patients (91%) had a history of stroke, and 45% had cognitive deficits, most notably on measures of attention/speed (48%), executive functioning (47%), visuoconstruction (41%), and memory (31%-54%). Only higher educational attainment and poor collateral blood flow in the right hemisphere differentiated cognitively impaired (n = 19) and intact groups (n = 23), and MMD-related characteristics (eg, disease duration, stroke history) did not differentiate the 2 groups., Conclusion: Consistent with previous work, frontal-subcortical cognitive deficits (eg, deficits in mental speed, attention, executive functioning) were found in nearly half of patients with MMD and better cognitive performance was associated with factors related to cognitive reserve. Angiographic metrics of disease burden (eg, Suzuki rating, collateral flow) and hemodynamic reserve were not consistently associated with poorer cognitive outcomes, suggesting that cognition is a crucial independent factor to assess in MMD and has relevance for treatment planning and functional status., (Copyright © Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2024. All rights reserved.)

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.

Background: Evidence suggests that adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) predict cognitive dysfunction, possibly through direct (e.g., brain structure/function changes) and indirect (e.g., increased psychopathology risk) pathways. However, extant studies have focused on young and older adults, with limited understanding of how ACEs affect cognitive health in midadulthood., Objective: This study compared psychiatric and cognitive differences between adults at high- and low-risk of adverse health outcomes based on the ACE risk classification scheme., Participants and Setting: Adult patients ( N = 211; 46.9% female; M age = 44.1, SD = 17.1; M education = 13.8, SD = 3.0) consecutively referred for outpatient neuropsychological evaluation within a large, Midwestern academic medical center., Method: Patients were divided into high and low ACE groups based on the number of ACEs endorsed. Subsequently, a series of one-way analyses of variances were conducted to compare high versus low ACE groups on the Test of Premorbid Functioning, Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth Edition Digit Span Test, Trail Making Test-Parts A and B, Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, Beck Depression Inventory-II, and Beck Anxiety Inventory scores., Results: Significant group differences were detected for anxiety and depression with the high ACE group endorsing significantly greater depression and anxiety symptoms relative to the low ACE group. High and low ACE groups did not significantly differ on any cognitive measures., Conclusions: Results indicate that an individual's psychological health, but not cognitive functioning, is impacted by the level of ACE exposure. Study findings highlight the importance of including ACE measures in neuropsychological evaluations, as it will aid in case conceptualization and tailoring treatment recommendations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Objective: Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are commonly reported in individuals presenting for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) evaluation. Performance validity tests (PVTs) and symptom validity tests (SVTs) are essential to ADHD evaluations in young adults, but extant research suggests that those who report ACEs may be inaccurately classified as invalid on these measures. The current study aimed to assess the degree to which ACE exposure differentiated PVT and SVT performance and ADHD symptom reporting in a multi-racial sample of adults presenting for ADHD evaluation., Method: This study included 170 adults referred for outpatient neuropsychological ADHD evaluation who completed the ACE Checklist and a neurocognitive battery that included multiple PVTs and SVTs. Analysis of variance was used to examine differences in PVT and SVT performance among those with high (≥4) and low (≤3) reported ACEs., Results: Main effects of the ACE group were observed, such that high ACE group reporting demonstrated higher scores on SVTs assessing ADHD symptom over-reporting and infrequent psychiatric and somatic symptoms on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form. Conversely, no significant differences emerged in total PVT failures across ACE groups., Conclusions: Those with high ACE exposure were more likely to have higher scores on SVTs assessing over-reporting and infrequent responses. In contrast, ACE exposure did not affect PVT performance. Thus, ACE exposure should be considered specifically when evaluating SVT performance in the context of ADHD evaluations, and more work is needed to understand factors that contribute to different patterns of symptom reporting as a function of ACE exposure., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objective: This study examined the impact of impairment in two specific cognitive abilities, processing speed and memory, on Dot Counting Test (DCT) classification accuracy by evaluating performance validity classification accuracy across cognitively unimpaired, single-domain impairment, and multidomain impairment subgroups within a mixed clinical sample., Method: Cross-sectional data were analyzed from 348 adult outpatients classified as valid ( n  = 284) or invalid ( n  = 64) based on four independent criterion performance validity tests (PVTs). Unimpaired ( n  = 164), single-domain processing speed impairment ( n  = 24), single-domain memory impairment ( n  = 53), and multidomain processing speed and memory impairment ( n  = 43) clinical subgroups were established among the valid group. Both the traditional DCT E-score and unrounded E-score were examined., Results: Overall, the DCT demonstrated acceptable to excellent classification accuracy across the unimpaired (area under the curve [AUC] traditional E-score=.855; unrounded E-score=.855) and single-domain impairment groups (traditional E-score AUCs = .690-.754; unrounded E-score AUCs = .692-747). However, it did not reliably discriminate the multidomain processing speed and memory impairment group from the invalid performers (traditional and unrounded E-scores AUC = .557)., Conclusions: Findings support the DCT as a non-memory-based freestanding PVT for use with single-domain cognitive impairment, with traditional E-score ≥17 (unrounded E-score ≥16.95) recommended for those with memory impairment and traditional E-score ≥19 (unrounded ≥18.08) with processing speed impairment. Moreover, results replicated previously established optimal cutoffs for unimpaired groups using both the traditional (≥14) and unrounded (≥13.84) E-scores. However, the DCT did not reliably discriminate between invalid performance and multidomain cognitive impairment, indicating caution is warranted when using the DCT with patients suspected of greater cognitive impairment.

Objective: We assessed the effect of visual learning and recall impairment on Victoria Symptom Validity Test (VSVT) accuracy and response latency for Easy, Difficult, and Total Items., Method: A sample of 163 adult patients administered the VSVT and Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised were classified as valid (114/163) or invalid (49/163) groups via independent criterion performance validity tests (PVTs). Classification accuracies for all VSVT indices were examined for the overall sample, and separately for subgroups based on visual memory functioning., Results: In the overall sample, all indices produced acceptable classification accuracy (areas under the curve [AUCs] ≥ 0.79). When stratified by visual learning/recall impairment, accuracy indices yielded acceptable classification for both the unimpaired (AUCs ≥0.79) and impaired subsamples (AUCs ≥0.75). Latency indices had acceptable classification accuracy for the unimpaired subsample (AUCs ≥0.74), but accuracy and sensitivity dropped for the impaired sample (AUCs ≥0.67)., Conclusions: VSVT accuracy and response latency yielded acceptable classification accuracies in the overall sample, and this effect was maintained in those with and without visual learning/recall impairment for the accuracy indices. Findings indicate that the VSVT is a psychometrically robust PVT with largely invariant cut-scores, even in the presence of bona fide visual learning/recall impairment.

Background: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is associated with various cognitive, behavioral, and mood symptoms that complicate diagnosis and treatment. The heterogeneity of these symptoms may also vary depending on certain sociodemographic factors. It is therefore important to establish more homogenous symptom profiles in patients with ADHD and determine their association with the patient's sociodemographic makeup. The current study used unsupervised machine learning to identify symptom profiles across various cognitive, behavioral, and mood symptoms in adults with ADHD. It was then examined whether symptom profiles differed based on relevant sociodemographic factors., Methods: Participants were 382 adult outpatients (62% female; 51% non-Hispanic White) referred for neuropsychological evaluation for ADHD., Results: Employing Gaussian Mixture Modeling, we identified two distinct symptom profiles in adults with ADHD: "ADHD-Plus Symptom Profile" and "ADHD-Predominate Symptom Profile." These profiles were primarily differentiated by internalizing psychopathology (Cohen's d  = 1.94-2.05), rather than by subjective behavioral and cognitive symptoms of ADHD or neurocognitive test performance. In a subset of 126 adults without ADHD who were referred for the same evaluation, the unsupervised machine learning algorithm only identified one symptom profile. Group comparison analyses indicated that female patients were most likely to present with an ADHD-Plus Symptom Profile ( χ2  = 5.43, p < .001)., Conclusion: The machine learning technique used in this study appears to be an effective way to elucidate symptom profiles emerging from comprehensive ADHD evaluations. These findings further underscore the importance of considering internalizing symptoms and patients' sex when contextualizing adult ADHD diagnosis and treatment.

Objective: Internalizing psychopathology commonly co-occurs with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Attention concerns are present in both ADHD and internalizing disorders, yet the neuropsychological functioning of those with comorbid ADHD and internalizing psychopathology is underexamined., Method: This study compared Conners' Continuous Performance Test-Third Edition (CPT-3) profiles across ADHD (n = 141), internalizing psychopathology (n = 78), and comorbid (ADHD/internalizing psychopathology; n = 240) groups., Results: Compared to the internalizing psychopathology group, the comorbid group had higher mean T -scores on CPT-3 indices indicative of inattentiveness and impulsivity and more clinically elevated T -scores ( T >60) on indices measuring inattentiveness and impaired sustained attention. Patients in the comorbid group were also more likely to have abnormal overall CPT-3 profiles (>2 elevated T -scores) than the ADHD and psychopathology only groups., Conclusion: Patients with comorbid ADHD/internalizing psychopathology may evidence a more impaired attentional performance on the CPT-3, which could aid in more tailored treatment planning., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Objective: This study investigated subfactors of cognitive disengagement syndrome (CDS; previously referred as sluggish cognitive tempo) among adults referred for neuropsychological evaluation of attentiondeficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)., Method: Retrospective analyses of data from 164 outpatient neuropsychological evaluations examined associations between CDS subfactors and self-reported psychological symptoms and cognitive performance., Results: Factor analysis produced two distinct but positively correlated constructs: "Cognitive Complaints'' and "Lethargy." Both correlated positively with symptom reports (rs = 0.26-0.57). Cognitive Complaints correlated negatively with working memory, processing speed, and executive functioning performance (rs = -0.21 to -0.37), whereas Lethargy correlated negatively only with processing speed and executive functioning performance (rs = -0.26 to -0.42). Both predicted depression symptoms, but only Cognitive Complaints predicted inattention symptoms. Both subfactors demonstrated modest to nonsignificant associations with cognitive performance after accounting for estimated premorbid intelligence and inattention., Conclusion: Findings indicate a bidimensional conceptualization of CDS, with differential associations between its constituent subfactors, reported symptoms, and cognitive performance., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Introduction: The Clinical Assessment of Attention Deficit-Adult is among the few questionnaires that offer validity indicators (i.e., Negative Impression [NI], Infrequency [IF], and Positive Impression [PI]) for classifying underreporting and overreporting of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms. This is the first study to cross-validate the NI, IF, and PI scales in a sample of adults with suspected or known ADHD., Method: Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to examine the independent and combined value of the NI, IF, and PI scores in predicting invalid symptom reporting and neurocognitive performance in a sample of 543 adults undergoing ADHD evaluation., Results: The NI scale demonstrated better classification accuracy than the IF scale in discriminating patients with and without valid scores on measures of overreporting. Only NI scores significantly predicted validity status when used in combination with IF scores. Optimal cut-scores for the NI (≤51; 30% sensitivity / 90% specificity) and IF (≥4; 18% sensitivity / 90% specificity) scales were consistent with those reported in the original manual; however, these indicators poorly discriminated patients with invalid and valid neurocognitive performance. The PI scale demonstrated acceptable classification accuracy in discriminating patients with invalid and valid scores on measures of underreporting, albeit with an optimal cut-score (≥27; 36% sensitivity / 90% specificity) lower than that described in the manual., Conclusion: Findings provide preliminary evidence of construct validity for these scales as embedded validity indicators of symptom overreporting and underreporting. However, these scales should not be used to guide clinical judgment regarding the validity of neurocognitive test performance.

This study examined the utility of dichotomous versus dimensional scores across two measures of social determinants of health (SDOH) regarding their associations with cognitive performance and psychiatric symptoms in a mixed clinical sample of 215 adults referred for neuropsychological evaluation ( M age = 43.91, 53.5% male, 44.2% non-Hispanic White). Both dimensional and dichotomous health literacy scores accounted for substantial variance in all cognitive outcomes assessed, whereas dimensional and dichotomous adverse childhood experience scores were significantly associated with psychiatric symptoms. Tests of differences between correlated correlations indicated that correlations with cognitive and psychiatric outcomes were not significantly different across dimensional versus dichotomous scores, suggesting that these operationalizations of SDOH roughly equivalently characterize risk of poorer cognitive performance and increased psychiatric symptoms. Results highlight the necessity of measuring multiple SDOH, as different SDOH appear to be differentially associated with cognitive performance versus psychiatric symptoms. Furthermore, results suggest that clinicians can use cut-scores when characterizing patients' risk of poor cognitive or psychiatric outcomes based on SDOH., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Objective: Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are early life experiences that influence mental health outcomes, though there are mixed findings reported in relation to attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms. The current study compared adults who experienced ACEs on measures of ADHD symptom reporting, psychological symptoms, and neurocognitive test performance., Method: The sample ( n  = 115) had mean age of 28.42 ( SD  = 6.46); educational attainment of 16.47 years ( SD  = 1.99); and was 35% male/65% female and racially/ethnically diverse. Participants completed measures of ACEs, ADHD symptoms, psychopathology, and perceived stress, as well as neuropsychological tests., Results: The high ACEs group endorsed higher levels of childhood/adulthood inattentive, impulsive, and hyperactive symptoms, and overall childhood symptoms when compared to the low ACEs group., Conclusions: This study provides a more comprehensive understanding of the association between ACEs and cognitive/mental health outcomes. Greater ACEs resulted in higher ADHD symptom reporting but not significantly greater psychological symptoms or worse neurocognitive performance., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Objective: High intelligence (IQ) adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) often perform better on neuropsychological tests relative to average IQ adults with ADHD, despite commensurate functional impairment. This study compared adults with ADHD and high versus average IQ on the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) to specifically assess this proposed masking effect of IQ on verbal learning/memory performance among those undergoing neuropsychological evaluation., Method: RAVLT performance between patients with ADHD and average versus high Test of Premorbid Function-estimated IQ were compared. Latent growth curve modeling (LGCM) evaluated learning acquisition across trials., Results: RAVLT total learning, immediate, and delayed free recall performances were significantly better in the high IQ relative to the average IQ group. LGCM showed similar quadradic growth trajectories for both IQ groups. Both groups reported equivalent symptom severity and functional complaints in childhood and adulthood., Conclusions: Adults with ADHD and high IQ performed normally on a verbal learning/memory test compared to adults with average IQ, who scored 0.5-1.0 standard deviations below the mean. These results suggest a masking of performance-based memory deficits in the context of higher IQ in adults with ADHD, supporting growing evidence that higher IQ masks neurocognitive deficits during the assessment of adults with ADHD.

Objective: Despite widespread use of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF), it is surprisingly understudied among adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This is significant as ADHD is a frequent referral for neuropsychological evaluation; however, the core symptom of attention difficulty is a nonspecific sequela of many psychological disorders. This study aimed to characterize MMPI-2-RF profiles among adults with ADHD and examine the effect of comorbid psychopathology., Method: A large, demographically diverse sample of 413 consecutive adults referred for neuropsychological evaluation to assist with differential diagnosis of ADHD who completed the MMPI-2-RF was examined. Profiles of the 145 patients diagnosed with ADHD-only were compared to 192 with ADHD and a comorbid psychological disorder and a 55-patient non-ADHD psychiatric comparison group. Among the ADHD-only group, profiles also were compared based on ADHD-presentation type (Predominantly Inattentive vs. Combined presentation)., Results: The ADHD/psychopathology and psychiatric comparison groups scored higher than the ADHD-only group across nearly all scales with widespread clinical elevations. Conversely, the ADHD-only group displayed an isolated elevation on the Cognitive Complaints scale. Comparison between ADHD presentations revealed several small-moderate significant differences, the largest of which occurred on the Externalizing and Interpersonal scales., Conclusions: Adults with ADHD alone, and no other psychopathology have a unique MMPI-2-RF profile characterized by isolated elevation on the Cognitive Complaints scale. These results support use of the MMPI-2-RF in assessment of adults with ADHD as it can help distinguish ADHD alone from ADHD/comorbid psychopathology and identify relevant psychiatric comorbidities that may be contributing to patients' inattention complaints., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permission@oup.com.)

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 (η p 2 =.01-.18). Invalid symptom reporting had minimal effects on cognitive test performance (η p 2 = ≤.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.

This study investigated the individual and combined utility of 10 embedded validity indicators (EVIs) within executive functioning, attention/working memory, and processing speed measures in 585 adults referred for an attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) evaluation. Participants were categorized into invalid and valid performance groups as determined by scores from empirical performance validity indicators. Analyses revealed that all of the EVIs could meaningfully discriminate invalid from valid performers (AUCs = .69-.78), with high specificity (≥90%) but low sensitivity (19%-51%). However, none of them explained more than 20% of the variance in validity status. Combining any of these 10 EVIs into a multivariate model significantly improved classification accuracy, explaining up to 36% of the variance in validity status. Integrating six EVIs from the Stroop Color and Word Test, Trail Making Test, Verbal Fluency Test, and Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth Edition was as efficacious (AUC = .86) as using all 10 EVIs together. Failing any two of these six EVIs or any three of the 10 EVIs yielded clinically acceptable specificity (≥90%) with moderate sensitivity (60%). Findings support the use of multivariate models to improve the identification of performance invalidity in ADHD evaluations, but chaining multiple EVIs may only be helpful to an extent.

Background: Assessing neurodevelopmental functioning in early infancy is essential as this is a critical period for infant development. Infants born to mothers with HIV are at a greater risk of developmental delays than those born to mothers without HIV. In this study, we analyzed differences in early neurodevelopmental functioning for infants with HIV exposure versus HIV infection to inform infant screening and early intervention., Methods: Participants were recruited from community health centers in Mpumalanga Province, South Africa. Prenatally, mothers completed baseline demographic assessment at 8 to 24-week gestation periods. Infant neurodevelopment was assessed using the Bayley Infant Neurodevelopmental Screener (BINS) 12 months postnatally. Five areas of development were assessed: cognition, receptive communication, expressive communication, fine motor ability, and gross motor ability., Findings: Postnatal infant assessment using the BINS revealed that infants were at risk for neurodevelopmental delays across all domains assessed. Notably, infants exposed to HIV, regardless of HIV status, were 'at emerging risk' or 'at clear risk' for cognitive (43.5%), receptive communication (38.2%), expressive communication (53.1%), fine motor (49.9%), and gross motor delays (55.6%). Differences were noted by HIV status in the cognition domain, such that HIV-exposed infants were more likely to be at emerging or clear risk than HIV-infected infants. There was a different trend with gross motor delays, such that HIV-infected infants were at a greater risk for motor delays than HIV-exposed, uninfected infants., Conclusion: Screening tools for this vulnerable population provide valuable early life assessment to determine infant needs for intervention and treatment planning. Such interventions may mitigate the impact of HIV status on neurodevelopmental health generally and cognition., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

The Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire (NPI-Q) is a collateral-rated measure of behavioral and psychological symptoms commonly found in dementia (BPSD). Several factor structures have been published, but they have not been systematically compared. Furthermore, the possibility of hierarchical models or presence of measurement invariance around cognitive stage or dementia syndrome has not been previously evaluated. This study addressed these gaps with confirmatory factor analyses using a multicenter sample ( n = 41,801; M age = 71.4; 57% women; 79% White, 13% Black, 8% Hispanic; M education = 15.1) that was divided into exploratory, derivation, and holdover subsets for cross-validation. We found that a four-factor model had the best fit, with adequate reliability estimates, adequate τ-equivalence, and the least amount of measurement variance. Strict invariance across stage and syndrome was not supported, although there was adequate support for weaker restrictions (e.g., equal forms). Furthermore, all bifactor models had a significant increase in fit. In sum, the present study provides practical guidance on using NPI-Q factor-derived subscales and theoretical elaboration of BPSD's hierarchical and syndrome-variant structure. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Objective: Reliable Digit Span (RDS), RDS-Revised (RDS-R), and age-corrected scaled score (ACSS) have been previously validated as embedded performance validity tests (PVTs) from the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-IV Digit Span subtest (WAIS-IV DS). However, few studies have directly compared the relative utility of these and other proposed WAIS-IV DS validity indicators within a single sample., Method: This study compared classification accuracies of 10 WAIS-IV DS indices in a mixed neuropsychiatric sample of 227 outpatients who completed a standardized neuropsychological battery. Participants with ≤1 PVT failures of the four, freestanding criterion PVTs constituted the valid group (n = 181), whereas those with ≥2 PVT failures formed the invalid group (n = 46). Among the valid group, 113 met criteria for mild cognitive impairment (MCI)., Results: Classification accuracies for all DS indicators were statistically significant across the overall sample and subsamples with and without MCI, apart from indices derived from the Forward trial in the MCI sample. DS Sequencing ACSS, working memory RDS (wmRDS), and DS ACSS emerged as the most effective predictors of validity status, with acceptable to excellent classification accuracy for the overall sample (AUCs = 0.792-0.816; 35%-50% sensitivity/88%-96% specificity)., Conclusions: Although most DS indices demonstrated clinical utility as embedded PVTs, DS Sequencing ACSS, wmRDS, and DS ACSS may be particularly robust to cognitive impairment, minimizing risk of false positive errors while identifying noncredible performance. Moreover, DS indices incorporating data from multiple trials (i.e., wmRDS, DS ACSS) also generally yielded greater classification accuracy than those derived from a single trial., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Embedded validity indicators (EVIs) derived from motor tests have received less empirical attention than those derived from tests of other neuropsychological abilities, particularly memory. Preliminary evidence suggests that the Grooved Pegboard Test (GPB) may function as an EVI, but existing studies were largely conducted using simulators and population samples without cognitive impairment. In this study we aimed to evaluate the GPB's classification accuracy as an EVI among a mixed clinical neuropsychiatric sample with and without cognitive impairment. This cross-sectional study comprised 223 patients clinically referred for neuropsychological testing. GPB raw and T-scores for both dominant and nondominant hands were examined as EVIs. A known-groups design, based on ≤1 failure on a battery of validated, independent criterion PVTs, showed that GPB performance differed significantly by validity group. Within the valid group, receiver operating characteristic curve analyses revealed that only the dominant hand raw score displayed acceptable classification accuracy for detecting invalid performance (area under curve [AUC] = .72), with an optimal cut-score of ≥106 seconds (33% sensitivity/88% specificity). All other scores had marginally lower classification accuracy (AUCs = .65-.68) for differentiating valid from invalid performers. Therefore, the GPB demonstrated limited utility as an EVI in a clinical sample containing patients with bona fide cognitive impairment.

This study cross-validated the dot counting test (DCT) as a performance validity test (PVT) in an adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) clinical population and examined the effect of ADHD subtype and psychiatric comorbidity on accuracy for detecting invalidity. DCT performance was assessed among 210 consecutive adult ADHD referrals who underwent neuropsychological evaluation and were classified into valid ( n = 175) or invalid ( n = 35) groups based on seven independent criterion PVTs. The invalid group had significantly worse DCT performance than the valid group using both the standard and unrounded scoring procedure ( η p 2 = . 28 ). Classification accuracy was excellent, with 54.3% sensitivity/92% specificity at optimal cut-scores of ≥14 (rounded) and ≥13.38 (unrounded). Nonsignificant DCT performance differences emerged based on ADHD subtype or the presence/absence of comorbid psychopathology. The DCT functions well as a nonmemory-based PVT in an ethnoracially diverse ADHD population, supporting its clinical utility for detecting invalid neurocognitive performance during ADHD evaluations.

Objective: Cognitive disengagement syndrome (CDS) is characterized by inattention, under-arousal, and fatigue and frequently co-occurs with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Although CDS is associated with cognitive complaints, its association with objective cognitive performance is less well understood., Method: This study investigated neuropsychological correlates of CDS symptoms among 169 adults ( M age  = 29.4) referred for outpatient neuropsychological evaluation following inattention complaints. We evaluated cognitive and self-report differences across four high/low CDS and positive/negative ADHD groups, and cognitive and self-report correlates of CDS symptomology., Results: There were no differences in cognitive performance, significant differences in self-reported psychiatric symptoms (greater CDS symptomatology, impulsivity among the high CDS groups; greater inattention among the positive ADHD/high CDS groups; greater hyperactivity among the positive ADHD groups), significant intercorrelations within cognitive and self-report measures, nonsignificant correlations between cognitive measures and self-report measures., Conclusion: Findings support prior work demonstrating weak to null associations between ADHD and CDS symptoms and cognitive performance among adults.

Objective: This study examined the extent to which demographic variables (i.e., age, education, premorbid IQ, sex, ethnoracial identity, and presence/absence of external incentive) affect performance validity test (PVT) performance., Method: This cross-sectional study examined two distinct, diverse outpatient clinical samples at an academic medical center (AMC, N = 268) and a Veterans Affairs (VA) medical center ( N = 111). All patients completed a battery including five PVTs. Premorbid IQ was assessed using the Test of Premorbid Functioning (TOPF) in the AMC sample., Results: Multiple correlations between demographic variables and individual PVT performance were statistically significant, but accompanying effect sizes were small, except for the relationship of premorbid IQ and reliable digit span (RDS). Regressions showed demographic variables accounted for 7%-11% of the variance in individual PVT scores in the AMC sample, and 6%-26% in the VA sample, premorbid IQ driving results in the AMC sample and compensation-seeking status in the VA sample. Other demographic variables did not correlate with compensation-seeking status. Additionally, premorbid IQ was found to be significantly higher in validly performing individuals compared to those performing invalidly in the AMC sample., Conclusion: Most demographic factors evaluated accounted for relatively little variance in individual PVT performance and did not significantly predict overall validity categorization. Compensation-seeking status correlated with validity classification across both groups, but offers limited diagnostic utility itself compared to objective PVT scores. Premorbid IQ within the AMC group demonstrated influence on particular PVTs (i.e., RDS) reflecting the difficulty of assessing validity within low IQ populations, particularly with PVTs more strongly correlated with IQ. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Objective: This study examined Dot Counting Test (DCT) performance among patient populations with no/minimal impairment and mild impairment in an attempt to cross-validate a more parsimonious interpretative strategy and to derive optimal E-Score cutoffs., Method: Participants included clinically-referred patients from VA ( n  = 101) and academic medical center (AMC, n  = 183) settings. Patients were separated by validity status (valid/invalid), and subsequently two comparison groups were formed from each sample's valid group. Namely, Group 1 included patients with no to minimal cognitive impairment, and Group 2 included those with mild neurocognitive disorder. Analysis of variance tested for differences between rounded and unrounded DCT E-Scores across both comparison groups and the invalid group. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses identified optimal validity cut-scores for each sample and stratified by comparison groups., Results: In the VA sample, cut scores of ≥13 (rounded) and ≥12.58 (unrounded) differentiated Group 1 from the invalid performers (87% sensitivity/88% specificity), and cut scores of ≥17 (rounded; 58% sensitivity/90% specificity) and ≥16.49 (unrounded; 61% sensitivity/90% specificity) differentiated Group 2 from the invalid group. Similarly, in the AMC group, a cut score of ≥13 (rounded and unrounded; 75% sensitivity/90% specificity) differentiated Group 1 from the invalid group, whereas cut scores of ≥18 (rounded; 43% sensitivity/94% specificity) and ≥16.94 (unrounded; 46% sensitivity/90% specificity) differentiated Group 2 from the invalid performers., Conclusions: Different cut scores were indicated based on degree of cognitive impairment, and provide proof-of-concept for a more parsimonious interpretative paradigm than using individual cut scores derived for specific diagnostic groups.

Introduction: Executive functioning (EF) is a salient factor in both ADHD as well as depressive disorders. However, sparse literature has examined whether depression severity impacts EF concurrently among adults with ADHD. The goal of this study was to examine differences in EF between adult patients diagnosed with ADHD and those diagnosed with a non-ADHD primary psychopathological condition, as a function of both ADHD presentation and depression severity in a diverse clinical sample., Method: This crosssectional study included 404 adult patients clinically referred for neuropsychological evaluation to assist with differential diagnosis and/or treatment planning related to known or suspected ADHD. Various EF tasks and a measure of depression severity were administered. One-way MANOVA analyses were conducted to compare EF performance between individuals diagnosed with ADHD or a non-ADHD primary psychopathological condition, with additional analyses examining group differences based on ADHD presentation and depression severity. Regression analyses also examined the potential contribution of depression severity to each EF measure within each group., Results: No significant EF performance differences were found when comparing individuals diagnosed with ADHD and those with a non-ADHD primary psychopathological condition, nor based on ADHD presentation. When comparing across groups using cut-offs for high or low depression, only one EF measure showed significant differences between groups. Further, depression severity generally did not predict reduced EF performances with the exception of verbal fluency and working memory performances in select groups., Conclusions: This study demonstrated that individuals with ADHD generally perform comparably on EF measures regardless of the presence or absence of comorbid depression. These results suggest further examination of EF deficits when they emerge for adults with ADHD, especially beyond comorbid depression severity.

This cross-sectional study compared adults diagnosed with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder-Inattentive (ADHD-I) and ADHD-Combined (ADHD-C) presentations with a non-ADHD group on verbal and visual learning and delayed recall using the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) and Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised (BVMT-R), respectively. Data from 380 predominately college student adult outpatients were used, with 155 who met criteria for ADHD-I, 165 who met criteria for ADHD-C, and 60 who did not meet criteria for ADHD but were diagnosed with a primary depressive or anxiety disorder or received no diagnosis. Each patient was administered the RAVLT and BVMT-R as part of a comprehensive neuropsychological evaluation. Significant main effects of study group were found, such that patients with ADHD-C demonstrated worse learning and delayed recall of both verbal and visual information than patients with ADHD-I and the non-ADHD group. Patients with ADHD-I performed comparably to the non-ADHD group, apart from visual learning and delayed recall. Notably, more patients in the ADHD groups had possible or probable learning and memory impairment compared to the non-ADHD group. Findings were consistent with previous research indicating that those with ADHD exhibit poorer verbal and visual learning and delayed recall than those without ADHD.

Objective: Electrical injury (EI) is a significant, multifaceted trauma often with multi-domain cognitive sequelae, even when the expected current path does not pass through the brain. Chronic pain (CP) research suggests pain may affect cognition directly and indirectly by influencing emotional distress which then impacts cognitive functioning. As chronic pain may be critical to understanding EI-related cognitive difficulties, the aims of the current study were: examine the direct and indirect effects of pain on cognition following EI and compare the relationship between pain and cognition in EI and CP populations., Method: This cross-sectional study used data from a clinical sample of 50 patients with EI (84.0% male; M age = 43.7 years) administered standardized measures of pain (Pain Patient Profile), depression, and neurocognitive functioning. A CP comparison sample of 93 patients was also included., Results: Higher pain levels were associated with poorer attention/processing speed and executive functioning performance among patients with EI. Depression was significantly correlated with pain and mediated the relationship between pain and attention/processing speed in patients with EI. When comparing the patients with EI and CP, the relationship between pain and cognition was similar for both clinical groups., Conclusions: Findings indicate that pain impacts mood and cognition in patients with EI, and the influence of pain and its effect on cognition should be considered in the assessment and treatment of patients who have experienced an electrical injury.

The utility of symptom (SVT) and performance (PVT) validity tests has been independently established in neuropsychological evaluations, yet research on the relationship between these two types of validity indices is limited to circumscribed populations and measures. This study examined the relationship between SVTs on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) and PVTs in a mixed neuropsychiatric setting. This cross-sectional study included data from 181 diagnostically and demographically diverse patients with neuropsychiatric conditions referred for outpatient clinical neuropsychological evaluation at an academic medical center. All patients were administered a uniform neuropsychological battery, including the MMPI-2-RF and five PVTs (i.e., Dot Counting Test; Medical Symptom Validity Test; Reliable Digit Span; Test of Memory Malingering-Trial 1; Word Choice Test). Nonsignificant associations emerged between SVT and PVT performance. Although the Response Bias Scale was most predictive of PVT performance, MMPI-2-RF SVTs generally had low classification accuracy for predicting PVT performance. Neuropsychological test performance was related to MMPI-2-RF SVT status only when overreporting elevations were at extreme scores. The current study further supports that SVTs and PVTs measure unique and dissociable constructs among diverse patients with neuropsychiatric conditions, consistent with literature from other clinical contexts. Therefore, objective evidence of symptom overreporting on MMPI-2-RF SVTs cannot be interpreted as definitively indicating invalid performance on tests of neurocognitive abilities. As such, clinicians should include both SVTs and PVTs as part of a comprehensive neuropsychological evaluation as they provide unique information regarding performance and symptom validity., Competing Interests: Conflict of InterestThe authors declare no competing interests., (© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2022, Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.)

This study investigated the relationship between symptom validity scales on the Clinical Assessment of Attention Deficit-Adult (CAT-A) and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) in the context of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) evaluation. The sample comprised 140 consecutive patients referred for a neuropsychological evaluation of ADHD and were administered the CAT-A and the MMPI-2-RF and a battery of performance-based neurocognitive tests. Results indicated CAT-A/MMPI-2-RF symptom validity concordance of 51% between measures, with 38% concordant valid and 13% concordant invalid responses. Among those with discordance symptom validity results, rates of valid CAT-A/invalid MMPI-2-RF responding (41%) were more common than invalid CAT-A/valid MMPI-2-RF responding (8%). Results also indicated higher levels of ADHD symptoms among invalid responding within the CAT-A, whereas the MMPI-2-RF Cognitive Complaints scale did not differ by CAT-A validity status. Finally, symptom validity scales on both the CAT-A and MMPI-2-RF were largely discordant from neuropsychological test validity status per performance validity tests. Findings highlight the need for symptom validity testing when assessing ADHD and indicate that validity indices on broad personality assessments may assess different constructs than embedded validity indices in ADHD-specific measures.

The utility of the Victoria Symptom Validity Test (VSVT) as a performance validity test (PVT) has been primarily established using response accuracy scores. However, the degree to which response latency may contribute to accurate classification of performance invalidity over and above accuracy scores remains understudied. Therefore, this study investigated whether combining VSVT accuracy and response latency scores would increase predictive utility beyond use of accuracy scores alone. Data from a mixed clinical sample of 163 patients, who were administered the VSVT as part of a larger neuropsychological battery, were analyzed. At least four independent criterion PVTs were used to establish validity groups (121 valid/42 invalid). Logistic regression models examining each difficulty level revealed that all VSVT measures were useful in classifying validity groups, both independently and when combined. Individual predictor classification accuracy ranged from 77.9 to 81.6%, indicating acceptable to excellent discriminability across the validity indices. The results of this study support the value of both accuracy and latency scores on the VSVT to identify performance invalidity, although the accuracy scores had superior classification statistics compared to response latency, and mean latency indices provided no unique benefit for classification accuracy beyond dimensional accuracy scores alone.

Objective The Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) Trial 1 (T1) and errors on the first 10 items of T1 (T1-e10) were developed as briefer versions of the TOMM to minimize evaluation time and burden, although the effect of genuine memory impairment on these indices is not well established. This study examined whether increasing material-specific verbal and visual memory impairment affected T1 and T1-e10 performance and accuracy for detecting invalidity. Method: Data from 155 neuropsychiatric patients administered the TOMM, Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT), and Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised (BVMT-R) during outpatient evaluation were examined. Valid ( N  = 125) and invalid ( N  = 30) groups were established by four independent criterion performance validity tests. Verbal/visual memory impairment was classified as ≥37 T (normal memory); 30 T-36T (mild impairment); and ≤29 T (severe impairment). Results: Overall, T1 had outstanding accuracy, with 77% sensitivity/90% specificity. T1-e10 was less accurate but had excellent discriminability, with 60% sensitivity/87% specificity. T1 maintained excellent accuracy regardless of memory impairment severity, with 77% sensitivity/≥88% specificity and a relatively invariant cut-score even among those with severe verbal/visual memory impairment. T1-e10 had excellent classification accuracy among those with normal memory and mild impairment, but accuracy and sensitivity dropped with severe impairment and the optimal cut-score had to be increased to maintain adequate specificity. Conclusion: TOMM T1 is an effective performance validity test with strong psychometric properties regardless of material-specificity and severity of memory impairment. By contrast, T1-e10 functions relatively well in the context of mild memory impairment but has reduced discriminability with severe memory impairment.

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.

Introduction: This study investigated a combination of eight embedded performance validity tests (PVTs) derived from commonly administered neuropsychological tests to optimize sensitivity/specificity for detecting invalid neuropsychological test performance. The goal of this study was to evaluate what combination of these common embedded PVTs that have the most robust predictive power for detecting invalid neuropsychological test performance in a single diverse clinical sample., Method: Eight previously validated memory- and nonmemory-based embedded PVTs were examined among 231 patients undergoing neuropsychological evaluation. Patients were classified into valid/invalid groups based on four independent criterion PVTs. Embedded PVT accuracy was assessed using standard and stepwise multiple logistic regression models., Results: Three PVTs, the Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised Recognition Discrimination (BVMT-R-RD), Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test Forced Choice, and WAIS-IV Digit Span Age Corrected Scaled Score, predicted 45.5% of the variance in validity group membership. BVMT-RD independently accounted for 32% of the variance in prediction of independent, criterion-defined validity group membership., Conclusions: This study demonstrated the incremental predictive power of multiple embedded PVTs derived from common neuropsychological measures in detecting invalid test performance and those measures accounting for the greatest portion of the variance. These results provide guidance for evaluating the most fruitful embedded PVTs and proof of concept to better guide selection of embedded validity indices. Further, this offers clinicians an efficient, empirically derived approach to assessing performance validity when time restraints potentially limit the use of freestanding PVTs.

Introduction: Although dementia prevalence differs by race, it remains unclear whether cognition and neuropsychiatric symptom severity differ between Black and White individuals with dementia., Methods: Using National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC) data, we evaluated dementia prevalence in non-Hispanic Black and White participants and compared their clinicodemographic characteristics. We examined race differences in cognition, neuropsychiatric symptoms, and functional abilities in participants with dementia using multivariable linear and logistic regression models., Results: We included 5,700 Black and 31,225 White participants across 39 Alzheimer's Disease Research Centers. Of these, 1,528 (27%) Black and 11,267 (36%) White participants had dementia diagnoses. Despite having lower dementia prevalence, risk factors were more prevalent among Black participants. Black participants with dementia showed greater cognitive deficits, neuropsychiatric symptoms/severity, and functional dependence., Discussion: Despite lower dementia prevalence, Black participants with dementia had more dementia risk factors, as well as greater cognitive impairment and neuropsychiatric symptom severity than White participants., (© 2021 the Alzheimer's Association.)

Embedded performance validity tests (PVTs) are key components of neuropsychological evaluations. However, most are memory-based and may be less useful in the assessment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Four non-memory-based validity indices derived from processing speed and executive functioning measures commonly included in ADHD evaluations, namely Verbal Fluency (VF) and the Trail Making Test (TMT), were cross-validated using the Rey 15-Item Test (RFIT) Recall and Recall/Recognition as memory-based comparison measures. This consecutive case series included data from 416 demographically-diverse adults who underwent outpatient neuropsychological evaluation for ADHD. Validity classifications were established, with ≤1 PVT failure of five independent criterion PVTs as indicative of valid performance (374 valid performers/42 invalid performers). Among the statistically significant validity indicators, TMT-A and TMT-B T-scores (AUCs = .707-.723) had acceptable classification accuracy ranges and sensitivities ranging from 29%-36% (≥89% specificity). RFIT Recall/Recognition produced similar results as TMT-B T-score with 42% sensitivity/90% specificity, but with lower classification accuracy. In evaluating adult ADHD, VF and TMT embedded PVTs demonstrated comparable sensitivity and specificity values to those found in other clinical populations but necessitated alternate cut-scores. Results also support use of RFIT Recall/Recognition over the standard RFIT Recall as a PVT for adult ADHD evaluations.

This study investigated the utility of four Stroop Color and Word Test (SCWT) indices, including the raw score and T score for the word reading (WR) and color naming (CN) trials, as embedded performance validity tests (PVTs) within a sample referred for evaluation of suspected or known attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Data were analyzed from a final sample of 317 patients consecutively referred for ADHD evaluation, which was divided into groups with invalid ( n = 43; 14%) and valid neuropsychological test performance ( n = 274; 86%). A subset of the valid group with confirmed ADHD diagnoses ( n = 226; 71%) were also analyzed separately. Classification accuracy for the overall valid sample was in the acceptable range (AUCs = .757-.794), with optimal cut scores of WR raw ≤75 (54% sensitivity/90% specificity), WR T score ≤ 28 (54% sensitivity/88% specificity), CN raw ≤57 (42% sensitivity/90% specificity), and CN T score ≤ 30 (40% sensitivity/90% specificity). Classification accuracy was also in the acceptable range for the ADHD-confirmed subgroup (AUCs = .750-.790), with optimal cut scores of WR Raw ≤ 75 (54% sensitivity/89% specificity), WR T score ≤ 28 (54% sensitivity/87% specificity), CN Raw ≤ 57 (42% sensitivity/90% specificity), and CN T score ≤ 30 (40% sensitivity/90% specificity). These findings indicate that embedded PVTs derived from the SCWT, particularly those derived from the WR trial, are effective measures for determining validity status in samples with suspected or confirmed ADHD. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

The Boston Naming Test (BNT) has been proposed as an embedded performance validity test (PVT), though replication is needed to provide further empirical support of its simultaneous use as a cognitive ability measure and embedded PVT. This cross-sectional study examined BNT performance in a mixed neuropsychiatric sample of 137 patients with/without cognitive impairment. Four independent criterion PVTs classified 109 (80%) as valid and 28 (20%) as invalid. BNT raw and demographically-corrected T -scores were significantly higher among the valid group with small effect sizes ( η p 2 = 0.04-0.05). Raw/ T -scores differentiated valid/invalid groups, but with low classification accuracy (areas under the curve [AUCs] = 0.68/0.63), and unacceptably weak sensitivities (i.e. 7%/18%). When separated by impairment status, raw score accuracy appreciably increased (AUC = 0.87; 61% sensitivity/89% specificity) among unimpaired patients, whereas T -score accuracy, while significant, remained low (AUC = 0.68; 21% sensitivity/89% specificity). Conversely, among impaired patients, neither the raw (AUC = 0.59) nor T -score (AUC = 0.60) accurately identified invalid performance. In sum, BNT scores were not able to differentiate valid from invalid performance when cognitive impairment was present, and therefore showed limited overall utility as embedded PVTs. These findings further caution against inferring performance validity from measures in which a single score is used to assess both cognitive ability and validity.

Objective: The aim was to set syndrome stage-specific (eg, cognitively unimpaired, severe dementia) metrics for functional change., Methods: We selected 18,097 individuals who participated in 2 National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center visits between June 2005 and May 2020, with completed collateral rating of functioning on activities of daily living assessed by the Functional Activities Questionnaire.Both distribution-based (ie, regression-based reliable change indices) and anchor-based (ie, typical change associated with advancing a syndromal stage for clinically meaningful difference) methods were applied for individuals classified as: unimpaired cognition, mild cognitive impairment, mild dementia, moderate dementia, or severe dementia., Results: There were marked differences in the distribution of functional ratings depending on their syndromal stage. There were also differences in the functional change associated with advancing across different syndromal stages. These informed stage-specific metrics for reliable change indices and clinically meaningful differences., Conclusions: Our indices provide a hitherto unavailable method that allows clinicians to determine whether observed functional change is reliable or meaningful based on syndromal stage., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

The Functional Activities Questionnaire (FAQ) is a collateral-report measure of difficulties in activities of daily living. Despite its widespread use, psychometric analyses have been limited in scope, piecemeal across samples, and limited primarily to classical test theory. This article consolidated and expanded psychometric analyses using tools from generalizability and item response theories among 27,916 individuals from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center database who completed the FAQ. Reliability was evaluated with internal consistency, test-retest, and generalizability analyses. Validity was assessed via convergence with neurocognitive measures, classification accuracy with impairment stage, and confirmatory factor and item response theory analyses. Demographics did not impact scores and there was strong evidence for reliability (0.52-0.95), though coefficients were attenuated when restricted in range to diagnostic groups (e.g., normal cognition). There were strong correlations with neurocognitive measures ( r s: -.30 to -.59), strong classification accuracy (areas under the curve: .81-.99), and a single-factor model had excellent fit. All items evidenced strong item response theory discrimination and provided significant information regarding functional disability, albeit within a relatively restricted range. The FAQ is a reliable and valid measure of activities of daily living concerns for use in clinical/research settings. It best assesses mild levels of functional difficulty, which is helpful in distinguishing normal cognition from mild cognitive impairment and dementia.

Objective: Primary angiitis of the central nervous system (PACNS) is a rare and devastating form of vasculitis that destroys the vessels of the brain and spinal cord, resulting in progressive and debilitating neurologic symptoms. The objective of the present study was to detail the diagnostic process of a case of a patient with PACNS who suffered from six intracerebral hemorrhages (ICHs)., Method: The patient was an African American woman with a history of recurrent ICHs of unclear etiology who received serial neuropsychological evaluations over the course of a 5-year period. Two comprehensive neuropsychological evaluations are included, as well as an overview of her clinical course, including differential diagnostic considerations and treatment planning., Results: Neuropsychological assessment revealed marked deficits in visuospatial abilities and processing speed associated with her underlying neuropathology. Integrated review of her medical records indicated a probable diagnosis of PACNS as the likely etiology of her recurrent ICHs., Conclusions: This study demonstrates the importance of differential diagnosis of low base-rate conditions, functional neuroanatomy and neurobehavioral phenomenology, serial assessment, and cognitive reserve in clinical neuropsychological practice.

This study cross-validated the Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT) in a mixed neuropsychiatric sample and examined its accuracy for identifying invalid neuropsychological performance using a known-groups design. Cross-sectional data from 129 clinical patients who completed the MSVT were examined. Validity groups were established using six, independent criterion performance validity tests, which yielded 98 patients in the valid group and 31 in the invalid group. All MSVT subtest scores were significantly lower in the invalid group (η p 2 =.22-.39). Using published cut-scores, sensitivities of 42% to 71% were found among the primary effort subtests, and 74% sensitivity/90% specificity was observed for the overall MSVT. Among this sample, the MSVT component validity scales produced areas under the curve of .78-.86, suggesting moderate classification accuracy. At optimal cut-scores, the MSVT primary effort validity scales demonstrated 55% to 71% sensitivity/91% to 93% specificity, with the Consistency subtest exhibiting the strongest psychometric properties. The MSVT exhibited relatively robust sensitivity and specificity, supporting its utility as a briefer freestanding performance validity test to its predecessor, the Word Memory Test. Finally, the Genuine Memory Impairment Profile appears promising for patients with Major Neurocognitive Disorder, but is cautioned against for those without significant functional decline in activities of daily living at this time.

Objective: This study cross-validated the word choice test (WCT) in a diverse neuropsychiatric sample and examined the effect of increasing verbal memory impairment severity on WCT performance., Method: Data from 147 clinically referred patients (113 valid/34 invalid) who completed the WCT, Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT), and four independent criterion PVTs were analyzed. RAVLT memory impairment bands used were: ≥37T (normal memory); 30T-36T (below average scores/mild impairment); and ≤29T (extremely low scores/severe impairment)., Results: WCT and RAVLT were moderately correlated. The invalid group had significantly worse performance on the WCT and RAVLT. For the overall sample, the WCT yielded an area under the curve (AUC) = .79, with 62% sensitivity/93% specificity at a cut-score of ≤41. When the sample was subdivided by memory impairment severity, the severe impairment group had significantly lower WCT scores than the normal group. Moreover, the WCT retained moderate classification accuracy among the normal memory (AUC = .85) and mild memory impairment (AUC = .76) groups, with sensitivities of 65% and 62% (≥91% specificity) at their respective optimal cut-scores of ≤44 and ≤42. In contrast, the WCT had low classification accuracy among those with severe memory impairment (AUC = .66), with only 15% sensitivity/95% specificity at the optimal cut-score of ≤30., Conclusion: The WCT is generally useful for detecting invalid neuropsychological test performance, although, its classification accuracy was diminished among patients with severe memory impairment. Therefore, while the WCT remains a viable option for performance validity assessment, neuropsychologists should carefully consider its use when this level of severe memory impairment is known or suspected.

Previous studies support using two abbreviated tests of the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM), including (a) Trial 1 (T1) and (b) the number of errors on the first 10 items of T1 (T1e10), as performance validity tests (PVTs). In this study, we examined the independent and aggregated predictive utility of TOMM T1 and T1e10 for identifying invalid neuropsychological test performance across two clinical samples. We employed cross-sectional research to examine two independent and demographically diverse mixed samples of military veterans and civilians (VA = 108; academic medical center = 234) of patients who underwent neuropsychological evaluations. We determined validity groups by patient performance on four independent criterion PVTs. We established concordances between passing/failing the TOMM T1e10 and T1, followed by logistic regression to determine individual and aggregated accuracy of T1e10 and T1 for predicting validity group membership. Concordance between passing T1e10 and T1 was high, as was overall validity (87-98%) across samples. By contrast, T1e10 failure was more highly concordant with T1 failure (69-77%) than with overall invalidity status (59-60%) per criterion PVTs, whereas T1 failure was more highly concordant with invalidity status (72-88%) per criterion PVTs. Logistic regression analyses demonstrated similar results, with T1 accounting for more variance than T1e10. However, combining T1e10 and T1 accounted for the most variance of any model, with T1e10 and T1 each emerging as significant predictors. TOMM T1 and, to a lesser extent, T1e10 were significant predictors of independent criterion-derived validity status across two distinct clinical samples, but they did not offer improved classification accuracy when aggregated.

The California Verbal Learning Test-Second Edition (CVLT-II) Forced Choice Recognition (FC) and Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised (BVMT-R) Recognition Discrimination Index (RD) are embedded performance validity tests (PVTs) assessing material-specific neuropsychological processes (i.e., verbal and visual memory, respectively). Prior research demonstrated the utility of these PVTs independently; however, no study has compared their diagnostic accuracy for identifying invalid performance relative to each other and in combination within a single sample. This cross-sectional study included an adult neuropsychiatric sample who underwent neuropsychological evaluation. Validity groups were determined via independent criterion PVT performance, and consisted of 103 participants with valid and 25 with invalid neurocognitive performance. FC and RD were not significantly correlated ( r  = .154), yet both differed between validity groups ( η p 2  = .14-.19). Previously established FC (≤14) and RD (≤4) cutoffs evidenced 32-40% sensitivity/90-98% specificity, though receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses indicated a more liberal FC cutoff (≤15) was optimal. Logistic regression models utilizing both embedded PVTs indicated that FC did not significantly improve classification accuracy above and beyond RD. Results support the clinical utility of existing cutoffs for FC and RD for independently identifying invalid performance, though the latter showed relatively better ability to detect invalid performance when both are used together.

Objective: This cross-sectional study examined accuracy of traditional Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT) validity indicators, including immediate recognition (IR), delayed recognition (DR), and consistency (CNS), as well as a novel indicator derived from the mean performance on IR, DR, and CNS across verbal, visual, and combined learning and memory impairment bands., Method: A sample of 180 adult outpatients was divided into valid (n = 150) and invalid (n = 30) groups based on results of four independent criterion performance validity tests. Verbal and visual learning and recall were classified as indicative of no impairment, mild impairment, or severe impairment based on performance on the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test and Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised, respectively., Results: In general, individual MSVT subtests were able to accurately classify performance as valid or invalid, even in the context of severe learning and memory deficits. However, as verbal and visual memory impairment increased, optimal MSVT cut-scores diverged from manual-specified cutoffs such that DR and CNS required cut-scores to be lowered to maintain adequate specificity. By contrast, the newly proposed scoring algorithm generally showed more robust psychometric properties across the memory impairment bands., Conclusions: The mean performance index, a novel scoring algorithm using the mean of the three primary MSVT subtests, may be a more robust validity indicator than the individual MSVT subtests in the context of bona fide memory impairment., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permission@oup.com.)

Objective: We examined the impact of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) on both prospective (PM) and retrospective (RM) memory performance among a cross-sectional veteran sample., Method: Data from tests of PM/RM memory and PTSD, anxiety, depression and sleep disturbance symptoms were examined among a prospectively recruited sample of 26 veterans with confirmed PTSD (PTSD+) and 26 well-matched, combat-exposed controls who did not meet criteria for PTSD (PTSD-)., Results: Small-to-moderate negative correlations emerged between PTSD symptom severity, visuospatial RM and some aspects of PM; general anxiety correlated more strongly with memory. The PTSD+ group demonstrated significantly worse, but still average visuospatial RM; differences in PM were nonsignificant between groups. Regression analyses implicated generalized anxiety, but not other psychiatric symptomology, as significant contributors to all memory performances., Conclusions: Minimal memory differences were found between veterans with and without PTSD. PM/RM memory performance was better explained by generalized anxiety rather that PTSD-specific symptoms., (Published by Oxford University Press 2021.)

Objective: This study examined concordance between symptom and performance validity among clinically-referred patients undergoing neuropsychological evaluation for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)., Method: Data from 203 patients who completed the WAIS-IV Working Memory Index, the Clinical Assessment of Attention Deficit-Adult (CAT-A), and ≥4 criterion performance validity tests (PVTs) were analyzed., Results: Symptom and performance validity were concordant in 76% of cases, with the majority being valid performance. Of the remaining 24% of cases with divergent validity findings, patients were more likely to exhibit symptom invalidity (15%) than performance invalidity (9%). Patients demonstrating symptom invalidity endorsed significantly more ADHD symptoms than those with credible symptom reporting ( ηp 2 = .06-.15), but comparable working memory test performance, whereas patients with performance invalidity had significantly worse working memory performance than those with valid PVT performance ( ηp 2 = .18)., Conclusion: Symptom and performance invalidity represent dissociable constructs in patients undergoing neuropsychological evaluation of ADHD and should be evaluated independently.

This cross-sectional study evaluated eight embedded performance validity tests (PVTs) previously derived from the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT), Wechsler Memory Scale-IV-Logical Memory (LM), and Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised (BVMT-R) recognition trials among a single mixed clinical sample of 108 neuropsychiatric patients (83 valid/25 invalid) with ( n = 54) and without ( n = 29) mild neurocognitive disorder. Among the overall sample, all eight recognition PVTs significantly differentiated valid from invalid performance (areas under the curve [AUCs] = .64-.81) with 26% to 44% sensitivity (≥89% specificity) at optimal cut-scores depending on the specific PVT. After subdividing the sample by cognitive impairment status, all eight PVTs continued to reliably identify invalid performance (AUC = .68-.91) with markedly increased sensitivities of 56% to 80% (≥89% specificity) in the unimpaired group. In contrast, among those with mild neurocognitive disorder, RAVLT False Positives and LM became nonsignificant, whereas the other six PVTs remained significant (AUC = .64-.77), albeit with reduced sensitivities of 32% to 44% (≥89% specificity) at optimal cut-scores. Taken together, results cross-validated BVMT-R and most RAVLT recognition indices as effective embedded PVTs for identifying invalid neuropsychological test performance with diverse populations including examinees with and without suspected mild neurocognitive disorder, whereas LM had more limited utility as an embedded PVT, particularly when mild neurocognitive disorder was present.

A sound performance validity test is accurate for detecting invalid neuropsychological test performance and relatively insensitive to actual cognitive ability or impairment. This study explored the relationship of several cognitive abilities to several performance indices on the Victoria Symptom Validity Test (VSVT), including accuracy and response latency. This cross-sectional study examined data from a mixed clinical sample of 88 adults identified as having valid neurocognitive test profiles via independent validity measures, and who completed the VSVT along with objective measures of working memory, processing speed, and verbal memory during their clinical neuropsychological evaluation. Results of linear regression analyses indicated that cognitive test performance accounted for 5% to 14% of total variance for VSVT performance across indices. Working memory was the only cognitive ability to predict significant, albeit minimal, variance on the VSVT response accuracy indices. Results show that VSVT performance is minimally predicted by working memory, processing speed, or delayed verbal memory recall.