一次就够了!关于多动症成人重复有效性评估的模拟研究。

IF 1.4 4区 心理学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Hui Dong, Yvonne Groen, Marieke Pijnenborg, Oliver Tucha, Steffen Aschenbrenner, Matthias Weissbrod, Janneke Koerts, Anselm B M Fuermaier
{"title":"一次就够了!关于多动症成人重复有效性评估的模拟研究。","authors":"Hui Dong, Yvonne Groen, Marieke Pijnenborg, Oliver Tucha, Steffen Aschenbrenner, Matthias Weissbrod, Janneke Koerts, Anselm B M Fuermaier","doi":"10.1080/23279095.2024.2431133","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Performance validity tests (PVTs) can be seen as gatekeepers for valid neuropsychological assessment, by marking cognitive test scores that may not reflect true ability levels. The present study explored the significance of repeated validity testing of adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), by exploring the potential value of performance consistency across assessments. The operational definition of performance consistency was determined by calculating the mean variation in a participant's PVT scores across three separate assessments. Neuropsychological test data of 24 individuals diagnosed with ADHD were complemented by an analogue study involving 69 typically developing individuals who were allocated to either a control group or a simulation group instructed to feign ADHD. All individuals were assessed with embedded and stand-alone PVTs three times with one-month intervals between each assessment. The rate of failed validity testing remained rather stable across assessments. Significant differences in neuropsychological performance scores occurred between individuals with ADHD and experimental simulators, however, mostly nonsignificant effects of small size emerged when considering performance consistency. Our data demonstrate that the consistency of cognitive performance over repeated assessments may be no effective approach to complement validity assessment. Replication is needed in independent research on larger samples.</p>","PeriodicalId":51308,"journal":{"name":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","volume":" ","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Once is enough! An analogue study on repeated validity assessment in adults with ADHD.\",\"authors\":\"Hui Dong, Yvonne Groen, Marieke Pijnenborg, Oliver Tucha, Steffen Aschenbrenner, Matthias Weissbrod, Janneke Koerts, Anselm B M Fuermaier\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23279095.2024.2431133\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Performance validity tests (PVTs) can be seen as gatekeepers for valid neuropsychological assessment, by marking cognitive test scores that may not reflect true ability levels. The present study explored the significance of repeated validity testing of adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), by exploring the potential value of performance consistency across assessments. The operational definition of performance consistency was determined by calculating the mean variation in a participant's PVT scores across three separate assessments. Neuropsychological test data of 24 individuals diagnosed with ADHD were complemented by an analogue study involving 69 typically developing individuals who were allocated to either a control group or a simulation group instructed to feign ADHD. All individuals were assessed with embedded and stand-alone PVTs three times with one-month intervals between each assessment. The rate of failed validity testing remained rather stable across assessments. Significant differences in neuropsychological performance scores occurred between individuals with ADHD and experimental simulators, however, mostly nonsignificant effects of small size emerged when considering performance consistency. Our data demonstrate that the consistency of cognitive performance over repeated assessments may be no effective approach to complement validity assessment. Replication is needed in independent research on larger samples.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51308,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-23\",\"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/10.1080/23279095.2024.2431133\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2024.2431133","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

摘要

表现效度测验(PVT)可以被视为有效神经心理学评估的把关人,它可以标记出可能无法反映真实能力水平的认知测验分数。本研究通过探索不同评估中表现一致性的潜在价值,探讨了对注意力缺陷/多动障碍(ADHD)成人进行重复有效性测试的意义。成绩一致性的操作定义是通过计算受试者在三次独立评估中 PVT 分数的平均变化来确定的。一项模拟研究补充了 24 名被诊断为多动症患者的神经心理测试数据,该研究涉及 69 名发育典型的患者,他们被分配到对照组或受指导假装多动症的模拟组。所有受试者都接受了三次嵌入式和独立的 PVT 评估,每次评估间隔一个月。各次评估的有效性测试失败率保持相当稳定。多动症患者和实验模拟人之间的神经心理学表现得分存在显著差异,但是,在考虑表现一致性时,出现的大多是小规模的非显著性影响。我们的数据表明,认知表现在重复评估中的一致性可能不是补充有效性评估的有效方法。需要在更大样本的独立研究中进行重复。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Once is enough! An analogue study on repeated validity assessment in adults with ADHD.

Performance validity tests (PVTs) can be seen as gatekeepers for valid neuropsychological assessment, by marking cognitive test scores that may not reflect true ability levels. The present study explored the significance of repeated validity testing of adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), by exploring the potential value of performance consistency across assessments. The operational definition of performance consistency was determined by calculating the mean variation in a participant's PVT scores across three separate assessments. Neuropsychological test data of 24 individuals diagnosed with ADHD were complemented by an analogue study involving 69 typically developing individuals who were allocated to either a control group or a simulation group instructed to feign ADHD. All individuals were assessed with embedded and stand-alone PVTs three times with one-month intervals between each assessment. The rate of failed validity testing remained rather stable across assessments. Significant differences in neuropsychological performance scores occurred between individuals with ADHD and experimental simulators, however, mostly nonsignificant effects of small size emerged when considering performance consistency. Our data demonstrate that the consistency of cognitive performance over repeated assessments may be no effective approach to complement validity assessment. Replication is needed in independent research on larger samples.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Applied Neuropsychology-Adult
Applied Neuropsychology-Adult CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-PSYCHOLOGY
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
11.80%
发文量
134
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.
×
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