Telepractice of the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS): Validation and Practical Considerations

IF 3 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Carla Tortora, Dalila Maglio, Irene Ceccato, Pasquale La Malva, Adolfo Di Crosta, Giulia Prete, Nicola Mammarella, Alberto Di Domenico, Rocco Palumbo
{"title":"Telepractice of the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS): Validation and Practical Considerations","authors":"Carla Tortora,&nbsp;Dalila Maglio,&nbsp;Irene Ceccato,&nbsp;Pasquale La Malva,&nbsp;Adolfo Di Crosta,&nbsp;Giulia Prete,&nbsp;Nicola Mammarella,&nbsp;Alberto Di Domenico,&nbsp;Rocco Palumbo","doi":"10.1155/hbe2/2981842","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Telepractice in neuropsychology has become increasingly prevalent in recent years due to its ability to provide accessible and convenient care to patients regardless of their location. However, the validation of many neuropsychological tools for distance assessments remains limited, and there is a particular lack of remotely administered assessment tests with alternate forms, which are crucial for monitoring symptoms and performance in clinical contexts and for minimizing practice effects in research practice. Consequently, the present study was aimed at evaluating the consistency of the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) scores across videoconference and face-to-face administrations and to examine whether the scores obtained via videoconference support interpretations similar to those obtained via face-to-face administration. A total of 185 participants aged between 20 and 79 years (M = 46.24, SD = 19.63) underwent RBANS testing twice: once in person using the standard pen-and-paper modality and once remotely via videoconference, using Alternate Forms A and B to mitigate the learning effects. Results from the linear mixed models revealed no significant differences between remote and face-to-face administrations based on the modality of administration (<i>p</i> &gt; 0.05). Bayes factors supported the null hypothesis, suggesting that RBANS performance is consistent across the two modalities of administration. However, discrepancies were observed in certain subtests between alternate forms of the RBANS, highlighting the need for standardization. In conclusion, findings suggested that the same norms that are used to interpret the RBANS scores obtained via face-to-face administration may be employed when administered remotely through videoconferencing. Accordingly, the study provides valuable insights into the feasibility of remote neuropsychological assessment and underscores the potential utility of videoconference technology in clinical and research settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":36408,"journal":{"name":"Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies","volume":"2025 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/hbe2/2981842","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/hbe2/2981842","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Telepractice in neuropsychology has become increasingly prevalent in recent years due to its ability to provide accessible and convenient care to patients regardless of their location. However, the validation of many neuropsychological tools for distance assessments remains limited, and there is a particular lack of remotely administered assessment tests with alternate forms, which are crucial for monitoring symptoms and performance in clinical contexts and for minimizing practice effects in research practice. Consequently, the present study was aimed at evaluating the consistency of the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) scores across videoconference and face-to-face administrations and to examine whether the scores obtained via videoconference support interpretations similar to those obtained via face-to-face administration. A total of 185 participants aged between 20 and 79 years (M = 46.24, SD = 19.63) underwent RBANS testing twice: once in person using the standard pen-and-paper modality and once remotely via videoconference, using Alternate Forms A and B to mitigate the learning effects. Results from the linear mixed models revealed no significant differences between remote and face-to-face administrations based on the modality of administration (p > 0.05). Bayes factors supported the null hypothesis, suggesting that RBANS performance is consistent across the two modalities of administration. However, discrepancies were observed in certain subtests between alternate forms of the RBANS, highlighting the need for standardization. In conclusion, findings suggested that the same norms that are used to interpret the RBANS scores obtained via face-to-face administration may be employed when administered remotely through videoconferencing. Accordingly, the study provides valuable insights into the feasibility of remote neuropsychological assessment and underscores the potential utility of videoconference technology in clinical and research settings.

Abstract Image

神经心理状态评估(rban)的可重复电池远程练习:验证和实践考虑
近年来,神经心理学的远程实践越来越普遍,因为它能够为患者提供无障碍和方便的护理,而不管他们在哪里。然而,许多用于远程评估的神经心理学工具的验证仍然有限,特别是缺乏具有替代形式的远程管理评估测试,这对于在临床环境中监测症状和表现以及在研究实践中最小化实践影响至关重要。因此,本研究旨在评估神经心理状态评估可重复电池(rban)分数在视频会议和面对面管理中的一致性,并检查通过视频会议获得的分数是否支持与面对面管理相似的解释。共有185名年龄在20至79岁之间的参与者(M = 46.24, SD = 19.63)接受了两次RBANS测试:一次是亲自使用标准的笔和纸的方式,一次是通过远程视频会议,使用替代表格A和B来减轻学习效果。线性混合模型的结果显示,基于给药方式的远程和面对面给药之间没有显著差异(p >;0.05)。贝叶斯因子支持零假设,表明rban的表现在两种给药方式中是一致的。然而,在不同形式的rban之间的某些子测试中观察到差异,突出了标准化的必要性。总之,研究结果表明,当通过视频会议远程管理时,用于解释通过面对面管理获得的rban分数的相同规范可能被采用。因此,该研究为远程神经心理学评估的可行性提供了有价值的见解,并强调了视频会议技术在临床和研究环境中的潜在效用。
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
Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies
Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
17.20
自引率
8.70%
发文量
73
期刊介绍: Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies is an interdisciplinary journal dedicated to publishing high-impact research that enhances understanding of the complex interactions between diverse human behavior and emerging digital technologies.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信