John-Christopher A Finley, Mira I Leese, Jarett E Roseberry, S Kristian Hill
{"title":"Multivariable utility of the Memory Integrated Language and Making Change Test.","authors":"John-Christopher A Finley, Mira I Leese, Jarett E Roseberry, S Kristian Hill","doi":"10.1080/23279095.2024.2385439","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Recent reports indicate that the Memory Integrated Language Test (MIL) and Making Change Test Abbreviated Index (MCT-AI), two web-based performance validity tests (PVTs), have good sensitivity and specificity when used independently. This study investigated whether using these PVTs together could improve the detection of invalid performance in a mixed neuropsychiatric sample. Participants were 129 adult outpatients who underwent a neuropsychological evaluation and were classified into valid (<i>n</i> = 104) or invalid (<i>n</i> = 25) performance groups based on several commonly used PVTs. Using cut scores of ≤41 on the MIL and ≥1.05 on the MCT-AI together enhanced classification accuracy, yielding an area under the curve of .84 (95% CI: .75, .93). As compared to using the MIL and MCT-AI independently, the combined use increased the sensitivity from .10-.31 to.70 while maintaining ≥.90 specificity. Findings also indicated that failing either the MIL or MCT-AI was associated with somewhat lower cognitive test scores, but failing both was associated with markedly lower scores. Overall, using the MIL and MCT-AI together may be an effective way to identify invalid test performance during a neuropsychological evaluation. Furthermore, pairing these tests is consistent with current practice guidelines to include multiple PVTs in a neuropsychological test battery.</p>","PeriodicalId":51308,"journal":{"name":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-29","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/10.1080/23279095.2024.2385439","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
Abstract
Recent reports indicate that the Memory Integrated Language Test (MIL) and Making Change Test Abbreviated Index (MCT-AI), two web-based performance validity tests (PVTs), have good sensitivity and specificity when used independently. This study investigated whether using these PVTs together could improve the detection of invalid performance in a mixed neuropsychiatric sample. Participants were 129 adult outpatients who underwent a neuropsychological evaluation and were classified into valid (n = 104) or invalid (n = 25) performance groups based on several commonly used PVTs. Using cut scores of ≤41 on the MIL and ≥1.05 on the MCT-AI together enhanced classification accuracy, yielding an area under the curve of .84 (95% CI: .75, .93). As compared to using the MIL and MCT-AI independently, the combined use increased the sensitivity from .10-.31 to.70 while maintaining ≥.90 specificity. Findings also indicated that failing either the MIL or MCT-AI was associated with somewhat lower cognitive test scores, but failing both was associated with markedly lower scores. Overall, using the MIL and MCT-AI together may be an effective way to identify invalid test performance during a neuropsychological evaluation. Furthermore, pairing these tests is consistent with current practice guidelines to include multiple PVTs in a neuropsychological test battery.
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.