Following international trends while subject to past traditions: neuropsychological test use in the Nordic countries

J. Egeland, M. Løvstad, A. Norup, T. Nybo, B. Persson, D. Rivera, A. Schanke, S. Sigurdardottir, J. Arango-Lasprilla
{"title":"Following international trends while subject to past traditions: neuropsychological test use in the Nordic countries","authors":"J. Egeland, M. Løvstad, A. Norup, T. Nybo, B. Persson, D. Rivera, A. Schanke, S. Sigurdardottir, J. Arango-Lasprilla","doi":"10.1080/13854046.2016.1237675","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Objective: Historically, the neuropsychological test traditions of the four Nordic countries have spanned from the flexible and qualitative tradition of Luria-Christensen to the quantitative large battery approach of Halstead and Kløve–Matthews. This study reports current test use and discusses whether these traditions still influence attitudes toward test use and choice of tests. Method: The study is based on survey data from 702 Nordic neuropsychologists. Results: The average participant used 9 tests in a standard assessment, and 25 tests overall in their practice. Test use was moderated by nationality, competence level, practice profile, and by attitude toward test selection. Participants who chose their tests flexibly used fewer tests than those adhering to the flexible battery approach, but had fewer tests from which to choose. Testing patients with psychiatric disorders was associated with using more tests. IQ, memory, attention, and executive function were the domains with the largest utilization rate, while tests of motor, visual/spatial, and language were used by few. There is a lack of academic achievement tests. Screening tests played a minor role in specialized assessments, and symptom validity tests were seldom applied on a standard basis. Most tests were of Anglo-American origin. Conclusions: New test methods are implemented rapidly in the Nordic countries, but test selection is also characterized by the dominating position of established and much researched tests. The Halstead–Reitan and Luria traditions are currently weak, but national differences in size of test batteries seem to be influenced by these longstanding traditions.","PeriodicalId":197334,"journal":{"name":"The Clinical neuropsychologist","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"27","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Clinical neuropsychologist","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2016.1237675","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 27

Abstract

Abstract Objective: Historically, the neuropsychological test traditions of the four Nordic countries have spanned from the flexible and qualitative tradition of Luria-Christensen to the quantitative large battery approach of Halstead and Kløve–Matthews. This study reports current test use and discusses whether these traditions still influence attitudes toward test use and choice of tests. Method: The study is based on survey data from 702 Nordic neuropsychologists. Results: The average participant used 9 tests in a standard assessment, and 25 tests overall in their practice. Test use was moderated by nationality, competence level, practice profile, and by attitude toward test selection. Participants who chose their tests flexibly used fewer tests than those adhering to the flexible battery approach, but had fewer tests from which to choose. Testing patients with psychiatric disorders was associated with using more tests. IQ, memory, attention, and executive function were the domains with the largest utilization rate, while tests of motor, visual/spatial, and language were used by few. There is a lack of academic achievement tests. Screening tests played a minor role in specialized assessments, and symptom validity tests were seldom applied on a standard basis. Most tests were of Anglo-American origin. Conclusions: New test methods are implemented rapidly in the Nordic countries, but test selection is also characterized by the dominating position of established and much researched tests. The Halstead–Reitan and Luria traditions are currently weak, but national differences in size of test batteries seem to be influenced by these longstanding traditions.
遵循国际趋势,同时受制于过去的传统:北欧国家的神经心理学测试使用
摘要目的:历史上,北欧四国的神经心理测试传统经历了从Luria-Christensen的灵活定性传统到Halstead和Kløve-Matthews的定量大电池方法的跨越。本研究报告了当前的测试使用,并讨论了这些传统是否仍然影响对测试使用和测试选择的态度。方法:本研究基于702名北欧神经心理学家的调查数据。结果:平均参与者在标准评估中使用9项测试,在实践中总体使用25项测试。测试使用受国籍、能力水平、实践概况和对测试选择的态度的调节。灵活选择测试的参与者比使用灵活电池方法的参与者使用的测试更少,但可供选择的测试更少。对患有精神疾病的患者进行测试与使用更多的测试有关。智商、记忆、注意力和执行功能是使用率最高的领域,而运动、视觉/空间和语言测试的使用率则很少。缺乏学术成就测试。筛选试验在专门评估中发挥的作用较小,症状效度试验很少在标准基础上应用。大多数测试都来自英美。结论:新的测试方法在北欧国家迅速实施,但测试选择的特点是已建立的和经过大量研究的测试占主导地位。Halstead-Reitan和Luria传统目前还很薄弱,但各国在测试电池尺寸上的差异似乎受到这些长期传统的影响。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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