Recent Advances in Neuropsychological Test Interpretation for Clinical Practice.

IF 5.4 2区 心理学 Q1 NEUROSCIENCES
Neuropsychology Review Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-18 DOI:10.1007/s11065-023-09596-1
Andrew M Kiselica, Justin E Karr, Cynthia M Mikula, Rylea M Ranum, Jared F Benge, Luis D Medina, Steven Paul Woods
{"title":"Recent Advances in Neuropsychological Test Interpretation for Clinical Practice.","authors":"Andrew M Kiselica, Justin E Karr, Cynthia M Mikula, Rylea M Ranum, Jared F Benge, Luis D Medina, Steven Paul Woods","doi":"10.1007/s11065-023-09596-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Much attention in the field of clinical neuropsychology has focused on adapting to the modern healthcare environment by advancing telehealth and promoting technological innovation in assessment. Perhaps as important (but less discussed) are advances in the development and interpretation of normative neuropsychological test data. These techniques can yield improvement in diagnostic decision-making and treatment planning with little additional cost. Brooks and colleagues (Can Psychol 50: 196-209, 2009) eloquently summarized best practices in normative data creation and interpretation, providing a practical overview of norm development, measurement error, the base rates of low scores, and methods for assessing change. Since the publication of this seminal work, there have been several important advances in research on development and interpretation of normative neuropsychological test data, which may be less familiar to the practicing clinician. Specifically, we provide a review of the literature on regression-based normed scores, item response theory, multivariate base rates, summary/factor scores, cognitive intraindividual variability, and measuring change over time. For each topic, we include (1) an overview of the method, (2) a rapid review of the recent literature, (3) a relevant case example, and (4) a discussion of limitations and controversies. Our goal was to provide a primer for use of normative neuropsychological test data in neuropsychological practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":49754,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology Review","volume":" ","pages":"637-667"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuropsychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-023-09596-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Much attention in the field of clinical neuropsychology has focused on adapting to the modern healthcare environment by advancing telehealth and promoting technological innovation in assessment. Perhaps as important (but less discussed) are advances in the development and interpretation of normative neuropsychological test data. These techniques can yield improvement in diagnostic decision-making and treatment planning with little additional cost. Brooks and colleagues (Can Psychol 50: 196-209, 2009) eloquently summarized best practices in normative data creation and interpretation, providing a practical overview of norm development, measurement error, the base rates of low scores, and methods for assessing change. Since the publication of this seminal work, there have been several important advances in research on development and interpretation of normative neuropsychological test data, which may be less familiar to the practicing clinician. Specifically, we provide a review of the literature on regression-based normed scores, item response theory, multivariate base rates, summary/factor scores, cognitive intraindividual variability, and measuring change over time. For each topic, we include (1) an overview of the method, (2) a rapid review of the recent literature, (3) a relevant case example, and (4) a discussion of limitations and controversies. Our goal was to provide a primer for use of normative neuropsychological test data in neuropsychological practice.

Abstract Image

用于临床实践的神经心理学测试解读的最新进展。
临床神经心理学领域的许多关注点都集中在通过推进远程医疗和促进评估技术创新来适应现代医疗环境。也许同样重要(但讨论较少)的是神经心理学常模测试数据的开发和解释方面的进展。这些技术可以改善诊断决策和治疗计划,而且只需很少的额外费用。布鲁克斯及其同事(Can Psychol 50: 196-209, 2009)雄辩地总结了常模数据创建和解释的最佳实践,对常模开发、测量误差、低分基数率以及评估变化的方法进行了实用性概述。自这一开创性著作出版以来,有关神经心理学常模测试数据的开发和解释的研究取得了一些重要进展,而这些进展对于临床执业医师来说可能不太熟悉。具体来说,我们将对基于回归的常模分数、项目反应理论、多元基率、汇总/因子分数、认知个体内部变异性以及随时间变化的测量等方面的文献进行回顾。对于每个主题,我们都包括(1)方法概述,(2)近期文献的快速回顾,(3)相关案例,以及(4)对局限性和争议的讨论。我们的目标是为在神经心理学实践中使用常模神经心理学测试数据提供一个入门指南。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Neuropsychology Review
Neuropsychology Review 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
1.70%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: Neuropsychology Review is a quarterly, refereed publication devoted to integrative review papers on substantive content areas in neuropsychology, with particular focus on populations with endogenous or acquired conditions affecting brain and function and on translational research providing a mechanistic understanding of clinical problems. Publication of new data is not the purview of the journal. Articles are written by international specialists in the field, discussing such complex issues as distinctive functional features of central nervous system disease and injury; challenges in early diagnosis; the impact of genes and environment on function; risk factors for functional impairment; treatment efficacy of neuropsychological rehabilitation; the role of neuroimaging, neuroelectrophysiology, and other neurometric modalities in explicating function; clinical trial design; neuropsychological function and its substrates characteristic of normal development and aging; and neuropsychological dysfunction and its substrates in neurological, psychiatric, and medical conditions. The journal''s broad perspective is supported by an outstanding, multidisciplinary editorial review board guided by the aim to provide students and professionals, clinicians and researchers with scholarly articles that critically and objectively summarize and synthesize the strengths and weaknesses in the literature and propose novel hypotheses, methods of analysis, and links to other fields.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信