Andrew M Kiselica, Justin E Karr, Cynthia M Mikula, Rylea M Ranum, Jared F Benge, Luis D Medina, Steven Paul Woods
{"title":"Recent Advances in Neuropsychological Test Interpretation for Clinical Practice.","authors":"Andrew M Kiselica, Justin E Karr, Cynthia M Mikula, Rylea M Ranum, Jared F Benge, Luis D Medina, Steven Paul Woods","doi":"10.1007/s11065-023-09596-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Much attention in the field of clinical neuropsychology has focused on adapting to the modern healthcare environment by advancing telehealth and promoting technological innovation in assessment. Perhaps as important (but less discussed) are advances in the development and interpretation of normative neuropsychological test data. These techniques can yield improvement in diagnostic decision-making and treatment planning with little additional cost. Brooks and colleagues (Can Psychol 50: 196-209, 2009) eloquently summarized best practices in normative data creation and interpretation, providing a practical overview of norm development, measurement error, the base rates of low scores, and methods for assessing change. Since the publication of this seminal work, there have been several important advances in research on development and interpretation of normative neuropsychological test data, which may be less familiar to the practicing clinician. Specifically, we provide a review of the literature on regression-based normed scores, item response theory, multivariate base rates, summary/factor scores, cognitive intraindividual variability, and measuring change over time. For each topic, we include (1) an overview of the method, (2) a rapid review of the recent literature, (3) a relevant case example, and (4) a discussion of limitations and controversies. Our goal was to provide a primer for use of normative neuropsychological test data in neuropsychological practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":49754,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuropsychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-023-09596-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Much attention in the field of clinical neuropsychology has focused on adapting to the modern healthcare environment by advancing telehealth and promoting technological innovation in assessment. Perhaps as important (but less discussed) are advances in the development and interpretation of normative neuropsychological test data. These techniques can yield improvement in diagnostic decision-making and treatment planning with little additional cost. Brooks and colleagues (Can Psychol 50: 196-209, 2009) eloquently summarized best practices in normative data creation and interpretation, providing a practical overview of norm development, measurement error, the base rates of low scores, and methods for assessing change. Since the publication of this seminal work, there have been several important advances in research on development and interpretation of normative neuropsychological test data, which may be less familiar to the practicing clinician. Specifically, we provide a review of the literature on regression-based normed scores, item response theory, multivariate base rates, summary/factor scores, cognitive intraindividual variability, and measuring change over time. For each topic, we include (1) an overview of the method, (2) a rapid review of the recent literature, (3) a relevant case example, and (4) a discussion of limitations and controversies. Our goal was to provide a primer for use of normative neuropsychological test data in neuropsychological practice.
期刊介绍:
Neuropsychology Review is a quarterly, refereed publication devoted to integrative review papers on substantive content areas in neuropsychology, with particular focus on populations with endogenous or acquired conditions affecting brain and function and on translational research providing a mechanistic understanding of clinical problems. Publication of new data is not the purview of the journal. Articles are written by international specialists in the field, discussing such complex issues as distinctive functional features of central nervous system disease and injury; challenges in early diagnosis; the impact of genes and environment on function; risk factors for functional impairment; treatment efficacy of neuropsychological rehabilitation; the role of neuroimaging, neuroelectrophysiology, and other neurometric modalities in explicating function; clinical trial design; neuropsychological function and its substrates characteristic of normal development and aging; and neuropsychological dysfunction and its substrates in neurological, psychiatric, and medical conditions. The journal''s broad perspective is supported by an outstanding, multidisciplinary editorial review board guided by the aim to provide students and professionals, clinicians and researchers with scholarly articles that critically and objectively summarize and synthesize the strengths and weaknesses in the literature and propose novel hypotheses, methods of analysis, and links to other fields.