{"title":"Raising the bar: Preliminary investigation of alternative MSVT cutoffs for adults referred for ADHD.","authors":"Anthony D Robinson, Matthew Calamia","doi":"10.1080/23279095.2025.2488355","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study investigated the classification accuracy of alternative cutoffs for three Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT) indices, Immediate Recall (IR), Delayed Recall (DR), and Consistency (CNS). Study 1 included 83 college students randomized into two simulated ADHD groups (Incentivized simulator <i>n</i> = 25; Non-incentivized simulator <i>n</i> = 28) and one control group (<i>n</i> = 30). Study 2 included cross-sectional data from 114 ADHD referrals at a university-based clinic (<i>n</i> = 91 valid group; <i>n</i> = 23 invalid group) who completed the MSVT and at least two additional performance validity tests. Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) curves in study 1 revealed significant areas under the curve for IR, DR, and CNS (AUC = .81 - .86), high to perfect specificity (.93 - .10), and moderate to high sensitivity (.45 - .75) using cutoffs of ≤85, ≤90, and ≤95. ROC curve analyses in study 2 yielded significant areas under the curve for IR (AUC = .73), DR (AUC = .74), and CNS (AUC = .78). An optimal cut score of ≤90 across all three subtests yielded modest sensitivity (.35 - .52) while still maintaining adequate specificity (.91 - .96). The manual-recommended cutoff for invalidity (IR, DR, or CNS ≤85) demonstrated high specificity (95%) but only modest sensitivity (35%) whereas the modified cutoff (IR, DR, or CNS ≤90) increased sensitivity substantially (56%) while maintaining adequate specificity (90%). This study provides preliminary support for alternative MSVT cutoffs in adult ADHD assessments. However, additional research is warranted before utilizing these alternative cutoffs in clinical contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":51308,"journal":{"name":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","volume":" ","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2025.2488355","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study investigated the classification accuracy of alternative cutoffs for three Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT) indices, Immediate Recall (IR), Delayed Recall (DR), and Consistency (CNS). Study 1 included 83 college students randomized into two simulated ADHD groups (Incentivized simulator n = 25; Non-incentivized simulator n = 28) and one control group (n = 30). Study 2 included cross-sectional data from 114 ADHD referrals at a university-based clinic (n = 91 valid group; n = 23 invalid group) who completed the MSVT and at least two additional performance validity tests. Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) curves in study 1 revealed significant areas under the curve for IR, DR, and CNS (AUC = .81 - .86), high to perfect specificity (.93 - .10), and moderate to high sensitivity (.45 - .75) using cutoffs of ≤85, ≤90, and ≤95. ROC curve analyses in study 2 yielded significant areas under the curve for IR (AUC = .73), DR (AUC = .74), and CNS (AUC = .78). An optimal cut score of ≤90 across all three subtests yielded modest sensitivity (.35 - .52) while still maintaining adequate specificity (.91 - .96). The manual-recommended cutoff for invalidity (IR, DR, or CNS ≤85) demonstrated high specificity (95%) but only modest sensitivity (35%) whereas the modified cutoff (IR, DR, or CNS ≤90) increased sensitivity substantially (56%) while maintaining adequate specificity (90%). This study provides preliminary support for alternative MSVT cutoffs in adult ADHD assessments. However, additional research is warranted before utilizing these alternative cutoffs in clinical contexts.
期刊介绍:
pplied Neuropsychology-Adult publishes clinical neuropsychological articles concerning assessment, brain functioning and neuroimaging, neuropsychological treatment, and rehabilitation in adults. Full-length articles and brief communications are included. Case studies of adult patients carefully assessing the nature, course, or treatment of clinical neuropsychological dysfunctions in the context of scientific literature, are suitable. Review manuscripts addressing critical issues are encouraged. Preference is given to papers of clinical relevance to others in the field. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief, and, if found suitable for further considerations are peer reviewed by independent, anonymous expert referees. All peer review is single-blind and submission is online via ScholarOne Manuscripts.