成人视频电话会议的神经心理学评估:系统回顾。

IF 1.4 4区 心理学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Soraia Silva Monteiro, Andreia Geraldo, Joana O Pinto, Isabel Maria Santos, Nick DeFilippis, Fernando Ferreira-Santos
{"title":"成人视频电话会议的神经心理学评估:系统回顾。","authors":"Soraia Silva Monteiro, Andreia Geraldo, Joana O Pinto, Isabel Maria Santos, Nick DeFilippis, Fernando Ferreira-Santos","doi":"10.1080/23279095.2025.2455538","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Among the diverse advantages that neuropsychological assessment via video teleconference (VTC) presents, increased accessibility and convenience are the most recognized. However, questions remain regarding the impact of VTC on the validity of neuropsychological testing. This systematic review aimed to (a) update the current knowledge of neuropsychological testing validity conducted via VTC in adults; (b) identify factors contributing to variability in results; and (c) recommend best practices for conducting these assessments. A total of 21 crossover studies were analyzed. The samples of these studies included healthy adults and individuals with cognitive impairments, with mean ages ranging from 23 to 81 years. Overall, the results point toward a strong agreement between VTC and in-person assessments. However, some variability was found across domains, with motor and timed tasks being particularly vulnerable to technical problems such as poor video/audio quality, unstable internet connections, limited familiarity with software and inadequacy of some devices. Additional challenges were identified when providing these services to individuals with cognitive impairments, specifically in tasks requiring clear verbal instructions or precise visual details. Further research is essential to establish standardized VTC protocols and administration guidelines, particularly for clinical populations, to mitigate variability and enhance the validity of VTC-based neuropsychological assessment.</p>","PeriodicalId":51308,"journal":{"name":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","volume":" ","pages":"1-18"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Neuropsychological assessment by video teleconference in adults: A systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Soraia Silva Monteiro, Andreia Geraldo, Joana O Pinto, Isabel Maria Santos, Nick DeFilippis, Fernando Ferreira-Santos\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23279095.2025.2455538\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Among the diverse advantages that neuropsychological assessment via video teleconference (VTC) presents, increased accessibility and convenience are the most recognized. However, questions remain regarding the impact of VTC on the validity of neuropsychological testing. This systematic review aimed to (a) update the current knowledge of neuropsychological testing validity conducted via VTC in adults; (b) identify factors contributing to variability in results; and (c) recommend best practices for conducting these assessments. A total of 21 crossover studies were analyzed. The samples of these studies included healthy adults and individuals with cognitive impairments, with mean ages ranging from 23 to 81 years. Overall, the results point toward a strong agreement between VTC and in-person assessments. However, some variability was found across domains, with motor and timed tasks being particularly vulnerable to technical problems such as poor video/audio quality, unstable internet connections, limited familiarity with software and inadequacy of some devices. Additional challenges were identified when providing these services to individuals with cognitive impairments, specifically in tasks requiring clear verbal instructions or precise visual details. Further research is essential to establish standardized VTC protocols and administration guidelines, particularly for clinical populations, to mitigate variability and enhance the validity of VTC-based neuropsychological assessment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51308,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-18\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-03\",\"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/10.1080/23279095.2025.2455538\",\"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/10.1080/23279095.2025.2455538","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

通过视频电话会议进行神经心理评估的诸多优势中,最被认可的是可及性和便捷性。然而,VTC对神经心理测试效度的影响仍存在疑问。本系统综述旨在(a)更新目前关于成人VTC神经心理测试效度的知识;(b)确定导致结果变化的因素;(c)建议进行这些评估的最佳做法。共分析了21项交叉研究。这些研究的样本包括健康成年人和有认知障碍的个体,平均年龄从23岁到81岁不等。整体而言,结果显示职训局与现场评估的结果十分一致。然而,在不同领域中发现了一些可变性,运动和定时任务特别容易受到技术问题的影响,例如视频/音频质量差,互联网连接不稳定,对软件的熟悉程度有限以及某些设备的不足。在为有认知障碍的人提供这些服务时,特别是在需要清晰的口头指示或精确的视觉细节的任务中,发现了额外的挑战。建立标准化的VTC协议和管理指南,特别是针对临床人群,是必要的进一步研究,以减轻变异和提高基于VTC的神经心理学评估的有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Neuropsychological assessment by video teleconference in adults: A systematic review.

Among the diverse advantages that neuropsychological assessment via video teleconference (VTC) presents, increased accessibility and convenience are the most recognized. However, questions remain regarding the impact of VTC on the validity of neuropsychological testing. This systematic review aimed to (a) update the current knowledge of neuropsychological testing validity conducted via VTC in adults; (b) identify factors contributing to variability in results; and (c) recommend best practices for conducting these assessments. A total of 21 crossover studies were analyzed. The samples of these studies included healthy adults and individuals with cognitive impairments, with mean ages ranging from 23 to 81 years. Overall, the results point toward a strong agreement between VTC and in-person assessments. However, some variability was found across domains, with motor and timed tasks being particularly vulnerable to technical problems such as poor video/audio quality, unstable internet connections, limited familiarity with software and inadequacy of some devices. Additional challenges were identified when providing these services to individuals with cognitive impairments, specifically in tasks requiring clear verbal instructions or precise visual details. Further research is essential to establish standardized VTC protocols and administration guidelines, particularly for clinical populations, to mitigate variability and enhance the validity of VTC-based neuropsychological assessment.

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