The development of ACE-III performance validity tests for dementia screening.

IF 1.7 4区 心理学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Donnchadh Murphy, Rupert Noad
{"title":"The development of ACE-III performance validity tests for dementia screening.","authors":"Donnchadh Murphy, Rupert Noad","doi":"10.1080/13803395.2026.2637508","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Performance validity tests (PVTs) are an essential component of a neuropsychological evaluation. There is a lack of brief validated PVTs for use alongside cognitive screening assessments for dementia. The current study sought to develop and evaluate a series of brief PVTs, which could be embedded into the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination (ACE-III) and used in a dementia clinic.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This study used a diagnostic accuracy design to compare the performance of 31 individuals with Alzheimer's disease dementia and 26 healthy older adults who simulated having Alzheimer's disease. Participants were asked to complete ACE-III, the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM), and five new brief PVTs developed based on ACE-III items, including the Object Recognition Test, Word Recognition Test, Dot Counting, ACE-III Digit Span, and the Coin in the Box test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The TOMM Trial 2 achieved excellent classification accuracy (AUC = 0.92). However, only 65% of people with moderate dementia were able to complete this test, and the standard cut off (45) had low specificity (0.69). Of the ACE-III PVTs, the Combined Object Recognition Test and ACE-III Digit Span test were both accurate in distinguishing between genuine and simulated cognitive impairment and achieved high levels of diagnostic accuracy (AUC = 0.89 and 0.85 respectively). The remaining PVTs achieved modest classification ability.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings of this research demonstrate that the Object Recognition and ACE-III Digit Span tests are candidate PVTs to be incorporated into the ACE-III for cognitive screening assessments. However, research using a known-group design and confirmatory data analysis procedures are required before these tests can be recommended for clinical practice. Similarly, the administration of PVTs by non-neuropsychologists during cognitive screening will require careful consideration.</p>","PeriodicalId":15382,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology","volume":" ","pages":"315-327"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2026.2637508","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Performance validity tests (PVTs) are an essential component of a neuropsychological evaluation. There is a lack of brief validated PVTs for use alongside cognitive screening assessments for dementia. The current study sought to develop and evaluate a series of brief PVTs, which could be embedded into the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination (ACE-III) and used in a dementia clinic.

Method: This study used a diagnostic accuracy design to compare the performance of 31 individuals with Alzheimer's disease dementia and 26 healthy older adults who simulated having Alzheimer's disease. Participants were asked to complete ACE-III, the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM), and five new brief PVTs developed based on ACE-III items, including the Object Recognition Test, Word Recognition Test, Dot Counting, ACE-III Digit Span, and the Coin in the Box test.

Results: The TOMM Trial 2 achieved excellent classification accuracy (AUC = 0.92). However, only 65% of people with moderate dementia were able to complete this test, and the standard cut off (45) had low specificity (0.69). Of the ACE-III PVTs, the Combined Object Recognition Test and ACE-III Digit Span test were both accurate in distinguishing between genuine and simulated cognitive impairment and achieved high levels of diagnostic accuracy (AUC = 0.89 and 0.85 respectively). The remaining PVTs achieved modest classification ability.

Conclusions: The findings of this research demonstrate that the Object Recognition and ACE-III Digit Span tests are candidate PVTs to be incorporated into the ACE-III for cognitive screening assessments. However, research using a known-group design and confirmatory data analysis procedures are required before these tests can be recommended for clinical practice. Similarly, the administration of PVTs by non-neuropsychologists during cognitive screening will require careful consideration.

ACE-III效度测试在痴呆筛查中的应用
目的:效能效度测试(pvt)是神经心理学评估的重要组成部分。目前还缺乏与痴呆认知筛查评估一起使用的简短有效的pvt。目前的研究试图开发和评估一系列简短的pvt,这些pvt可以嵌入到阿登布鲁克认知检查(ACE-III)中,并用于痴呆症诊所。方法:本研究采用诊断准确性设计,比较31名阿尔茨海默病痴呆患者和26名模拟患有阿尔茨海默病的健康老年人的表现。参与者被要求完成ACE-III、记忆伪造测试(TOMM)和基于ACE-III项目开发的5个新的简短pts,包括物体识别测试、单词识别测试、点计数测试、ACE-III数字广度测试和盒子里的硬币测试。结果:TOMM试验2获得了极好的分类准确率(AUC = 0.92)。然而,只有65%的中度痴呆患者能够完成这项测试,标准临界值(45)的特异性较低(0.69)。在ACE-III pvt中,综合目标识别测试和ACE-III数字广度测试在区分真实和模拟认知障碍方面都是准确的,并且达到了高水平的诊断准确性(AUC分别为0.89和0.85)。其余的pvt具有一般的分类能力。结论:本研究结果表明,物体识别和ACE-III数字广度测试是纳入ACE-III认知筛查评估的候选pvt。然而,在这些测试被推荐用于临床实践之前,需要使用已知组设计和验证性数据分析程序进行研究。同样,非神经心理学家在认知筛查期间给予pvt也需要仔细考虑。
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
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
4.50%
发文量
52
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology ( JCEN) publishes research on the neuropsychological consequences of brain disease, disorders, and dysfunction, and aims to promote the integration of theories, methods, and research findings in clinical and experimental neuropsychology. The primary emphasis of JCEN is to publish original empirical research pertaining to brain-behavior relationships and neuropsychological manifestations of brain disease. Theoretical and methodological papers, critical reviews of content areas, and theoretically-relevant case studies are also welcome.
×
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
小红书