Search

The Response Bias Scale (RBS) was developed to predict non-credible cognitive presentations among disability claimants without head injury. Developers used empirical keying, which is independent of apparent content, to select items from the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) item pool that distinguished between individuals passing or failing performance validity tests (PVTs). No study has examined which of these items would have psychometric value when used in clinical neuropsychological evaluations. This study reexamined items comprising RBS with reference to manifest item content, internal consistency, PVTs, and a symptom validity test (SVT) in a sample of 173 predominately White male veterans (MAGE = 50.70, MEDU = 13.73) in a VA outpatient neuropsychology clinic. Participants completed the MMPI-2 Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF), PVTs, and an SVT. The 28-item RBS appears to contain three types of items: those that manifestly address cognitive functioning, those that are supported but do not appear to address cognitive functioning, and nine items that were unrelated to cognition and not statistically supported. The 19 empirically supported items, or RBS-19, predicted PVT and SVT failures marginally better than the RBS. Both the RBS and RBS-19 had stronger relationships with SVTs relative to PVTs. Although the removal of the nine problematic items improved the diagnostic accuracy of the scale, it still did not reach the level that is generally considered to be clinically optimal. The RBS-19 offers a measure with improved internal consistency and predictive validity compared to the RBS and warrants additional research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) is frequently used as a cognitive screening measure or as part of a comprehensive neuropsychological battery. Augmenting the current memory subtests of the RBANS to reflect clinically meaningful distinctions in memory performance may improve its clinical utility, allowing users to generate additional hypotheses and refine clinical interpretations. We pilot four supplementary memory measures to use with the RBANS, adapted from paradigms commonly used by other neuropsychological tests. We also provide several new theoretically derived memory indices to supplement the standard Delayed Memory Index. The new subtests correlated significantly with the standard memory measures, and the new indices demonstrated good reliability and diagnostic accuracy. This study provides preliminary support for supplementing the RBANS to allow for more nuanced interpretations of memory performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) was developed to briefly measure a broad range of cognitive abilities, but it initially lacked a scale to evaluate executive functioning. Robert Spencer and colleagues recently created an Executive Errors scale (RBANS-EE) that quantified executive functioning (EF) errors committed during four RBANS subtests: List Learning, Semantic Fluency, Coding, and List Recall. In the present paper we cross-validated the RBANS-EE with a sample of 234 U.S. military veterans (M AGE = 67.2, SD = 11.5 years; M EDUCATION = 13.3, SD = 2.4 years) who completed the RBANS and various EF criterion measures as part of neuropsychological assessments they underwent during their clinical care. We found the RBANS-EE to be significantly correlated with most of the criterion EF measures. The RBANS-EE scale demonstrated modest ability to classify EF impairment at mild and severe levels; and, similarly, the RBANS-EE was modestly capable of accurately classifying those veteran respondents who were determined to have or to not have a neurocognitive disorder. Overall, the RBANS-EE can be quickly calculated, adds no administration time to an RBANS assessment, and yields useful scores to screen for EF dysfunction without replacing standalone EF tests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In learning and memory tests that involve multiple presentations of the same material, learning slope refers to the degree to which examinees improve performances over successive learning trials. We aimed to quantitatively review the traditional raw learning slope (RLS), and the newly created learning ratio (LR) to understand the effects of demographic variables and clinical diagnoses on learning slope (e.g., limited improvement over multiple trials), and to develop demographically sensitive norms. A systematic literature search was conducted to evaluate the potential for these aims to be examined across the most popular contemporary multi-trial learning tests. Two databases were searched. Following this, hierarchical linear modeling was used to examine how demographic variables predict learning slope indices. These results were in turn used to contrast the performance of clinical groups with the predicted performance of demographically similar healthy controls. Finally, preliminary normative estimates for learning slope indices were presented. A total of 82 studies met criteria for inclusion in this study. However, the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) was the only test to have sufficient trial-level learning and demographic data. Fifty-eight samples from 19 studies were quantitatively examined. Hierarchical linear models provided evidence of sex differences and a curvilinear decline in learning slope with age, with strongest and most consistent effects for LR relative to RLS. Regression-based norms for demographically corrected RLS and LR scores for the RAVLT are presented. The effect of clinical diagnoses was consistently stronger for LR, and Alzheimer's disease had the strongest effect, followed by invalid performances, severe traumatic brain injury, and seizures/epilepsy. Overall, LR enjoys both conceptual and demonstrated psychometric advantages over RLS. Replication of these findings can be completed by reanalyzing existing datasets. Further work may focus on the utility of using LR in diagnosis and prediction of clinical prognosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Learning Ratio (LR) is a novel learning score examining the proportion of information learned over successive learning trials relative to information available to be learned. Validation is warranted to understand LR's sensitivity to Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology. One-hundred twenty-three participants across the AD continuum underwent memory assessment, quantitative brain imaging, and genetic analysis. LR scores were calculated from the HVLT-R, BVMT-R, RBANS List Learning, and RBANS Story Memory, and compared to total hippocampal volumes,18F-Flutemetamol composite SUVR uptake, and APOE ε4 status. Lower LR scores were consistently associated with smaller total hippocampal volumes, greater cerebral β-amyloid deposition, and APOE ε4 positivity. This LR score outperformed a traditional learning slope calculation in all analyses. LR is sensitive to AD pathology along the AD continuum – more so than a traditional raw learning score – and reducing the competition between the first trial and subsequent trials can better depict learning capacity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Initial learning and learning slope are often acknowledged as important qualitative aspects of learning, but the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) contains discrete indices for neither. The traditional method of calculating learning slope involves a difference score between the last trial and first trial, which is referred to as raw learning score (RLS). However, this method does not account for initial Trial One performance and produces a ceiling effect that penalizes efficient first learners. We propose an alternative method of calculating learning score that accounts for initial learning performance, called learning ratio (LR), and we compared the psychometric and predictive properties of these methods. Performances from the List Learning and Story Memory subtests were used to create the indices, and composite learning scores were calculated by combining List Learning and Story Memory. The sample included 289 military veterans (mean age = 65.9 [12.6], education = 13.3 [2.4]), most of whom were male, undergoing neuropsychological assessments that included the RBANS. Results indicated that LR demonstrated superior correlations with criterion measures of memory when compared with RLS, and the LR composite score better discriminated between those with and without a neurocognitive diagnosis, AUC = 0.81 (0.76-0.87), than the RLS composite, AUC = 0.70 (0.64-0.76). We concluded that scores from the RBANS can be computed for initial learning and learning slope and that the LR method of calculating learning is superior to RLS in this older veteran sample. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The learning ratio (LR) is a novel learning slope score that has been developed to reduce the inherent competition between the first trial and subsequent trials in traditional learning slopes. In essence, the LR is the number of items learned after the first trial divided by the number of items yet to be learned. Criterion and convergent validation of this LR score is warranted to understand its sensitivity along the Alzheimer's disease (AD) continuum. Method The LR metric was calculated for 123 participants from standard measures of memory, including the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test—Revised, Brief Visuospatial Memory Test—Revised, Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) list learning, and RBANS story memory. All participants were categorized as normal cognition, mild cognitive impairment (MCI), or AD. LR performances were compared between groups, among other standard memory measures, and with regards to how well they discriminated cognitively impaired from unimpaired samples—and within diagnostic subgroups. Results Lower LR scores were observed for the MCI and AD groups than the normal cognition group, with the AD group performing worse than the MCI group for several slope calculations. Lower LR scores were also consistently associated with poorer performances on traditional memory measures. LR scores further displayed excellent receiver operator characteristics when differentiating those with and without cognitive impairment—and MCI from normal cognition. Overall, LR scores consistently outperformed traditional learning slope calculations across all analyses. Conclusions This LR score is sensitive to memory dysfunction along the AD continuum, and results offer criterion and convergent validity for use of the LR metric to understand learning capacity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The third trial of Golden's Stroop Color and Word Test (SCWT), which involves identifying the color of words printed in a color that contrasts with its spelling, is usually limited to 45 seconds. Some authors have opined on the benefits of extending this portion of the test beyond 45 seconds to increase sensitivity to cognitive deficits and preliminary data among healthy individuals support this notion. This project examined possible benefits of extending the test beyond the standard 45 second time limit. Fifty-four veteran patients completed the SCWT as part of outpatient neuropsychological assessment. Speed of completing items within 45 seconds was compared to the speed of completing items beyond the first 45 seconds. A composite measure made of neuropsychological tests requiring speed and complex attention served as the criterion measure. Results indicated that extending the interference trial of the SCWT did not improve prediction on criterion measures beyond the standard 45 second SCWT. In conclusion, among individuals undergoing clinical evaluations, extending the SCWT beyond 45 seconds is unlikely to yield sufficient meaningful clinical data to offset the additional administration time and potential frustration to examinees. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]