The Relationship Between Subjective Cognitive Complaints, Invalid Symptom Reporting, and Neurocognitive Test Performance Validity Among Adults Being Evaluated for ADHD.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 PSYCHIATRY Journal of Psychiatric Practice Pub Date : 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1097/PRA.0000000000000834
Matthew S Phillips, Nataliya Turchmanovych-Hienkel, Mira I Leese, Brian Ramanauskas, Hannah B VanLandingham, Christopher Gonzalez, Gabriel P Ovsiew, Anthony D Robinson, Brian M Cerny, Devin M Ulrich, Jason R Soble
{"title":"The Relationship Between Subjective Cognitive Complaints, Invalid Symptom Reporting, and Neurocognitive Test Performance Validity Among Adults Being Evaluated for ADHD.","authors":"Matthew S Phillips, Nataliya Turchmanovych-Hienkel, Mira I Leese, Brian Ramanauskas, Hannah B VanLandingham, Christopher Gonzalez, Gabriel P Ovsiew, Anthony D Robinson, Brian M Cerny, Devin M Ulrich, Jason R Soble","doi":"10.1097/PRA.0000000000000834","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Subjective cognitive complaints are common among patients presenting for evaluation of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Despite these complaints, research overwhelmingly suggests that reported cognitive deficits do not align with objective neurocognitive performance. This study explored the relationship between subjective cognitive complaints, objective neuropsychological functioning, and performance and symptom validity testing in adult patients referred for evaluation due to concern about ADHD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The sample consisted of 523 adult referrals who underwent comprehensive evaluation for concern about ADHD and to characterize cognitive strengths and weaknesses. Four hundred patients were diagnosed with ADHD, and 123 did not meet the diagnostic criteria for ADHD. Patients were dichotomized to form nonelevated (n=134) and elevated (n=389) cognitive complaint groups, which were compared on objective neurocognitive performance, report of ADHD-specific symptoms, and performance validity tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Significant differences were identified between the elevated and nonelevated cognitive complaints groups in performance validity tests and ADHD symptom reporting; however, clinical differences were not identified on objective neurocognitive measures.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Consistent with the results of previously published research, subjective cognitive complaints did not align with objective neurocognitive deficits in a sample of adult ADHD referrals. Elevated cognitive complaints were associated with higher rates of performance validity failure and invalid ADHD-specific symptom reporting. These findings highlight the importance of assessing cognitive complaints using symptom report inventories and cognitive tests that include objective validity indices.</p>","PeriodicalId":16909,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Psychiatric Practice","volume":"31 1","pages":"13-19"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Psychiatric Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PRA.0000000000000834","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Subjective cognitive complaints are common among patients presenting for evaluation of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Despite these complaints, research overwhelmingly suggests that reported cognitive deficits do not align with objective neurocognitive performance. This study explored the relationship between subjective cognitive complaints, objective neuropsychological functioning, and performance and symptom validity testing in adult patients referred for evaluation due to concern about ADHD.

Methods: The sample consisted of 523 adult referrals who underwent comprehensive evaluation for concern about ADHD and to characterize cognitive strengths and weaknesses. Four hundred patients were diagnosed with ADHD, and 123 did not meet the diagnostic criteria for ADHD. Patients were dichotomized to form nonelevated (n=134) and elevated (n=389) cognitive complaint groups, which were compared on objective neurocognitive performance, report of ADHD-specific symptoms, and performance validity tests.

Results: Significant differences were identified between the elevated and nonelevated cognitive complaints groups in performance validity tests and ADHD symptom reporting; however, clinical differences were not identified on objective neurocognitive measures.

Conclusions: Consistent with the results of previously published research, subjective cognitive complaints did not align with objective neurocognitive deficits in a sample of adult ADHD referrals. Elevated cognitive complaints were associated with higher rates of performance validity failure and invalid ADHD-specific symptom reporting. These findings highlight the importance of assessing cognitive complaints using symptom report inventories and cognitive tests that include objective validity indices.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
主观认知抱怨、无效症状报告与ADHD成人神经认知测试效能效度的关系
目的:主观认知主诉是常见的患者来评估的注意缺陷/多动障碍(ADHD)。尽管有这些抱怨,但研究压倒性地表明,报告的认知缺陷与客观的神经认知表现并不一致。本研究探讨了因关注ADHD而转介评估的成年患者的主观认知抱怨、客观神经心理功能与表现和症状效度测试之间的关系。方法:样本由523名成人转诊者组成,他们接受了ADHD关注的综合评估,并描述了认知优势和劣势。400名患者被诊断为多动症,123名患者不符合多动症的诊断标准。将患者分为非升高组(n=134)和升高组(n=389),比较客观神经认知表现、adhd特异性症状报告和表现效度测试。结果:认知抱怨升高组和非认知抱怨升高组在工作效度测试和ADHD症状报告方面存在显著差异;然而,在客观的神经认知测量中,没有发现临床差异。结论:与先前发表的研究结果一致,在成人ADHD转诊样本中,主观认知抱怨与客观神经认知缺陷不一致。认知抱怨的增加与更高的表现有效性失败率和无效的adhd特异性症状报告相关。这些发现强调了使用症状报告清单和包括客观效度指数的认知测试来评估认知抱怨的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
10.50%
发文量
159
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Psychiatric Practice® seizes the day with its emphasis on the three Rs — readability, reliability, and relevance. Featuring an eye-catching style, the journal combines clinically applicable reviews, case studies, and articles on treatment advances with practical and informative tips for treating patients. Mental health professionals will want access to this review journal — for sharpening their clinical skills, discovering the best in treatment, and navigating this rapidly changing field. Journal of Psychiatric Practice combines clinically applicable reviews, case studies, and articles on treatment advances with informative "how to" tips for surviving in a managed care environment.
期刊最新文献
Association of Lambert-Eaton Myasthenic Syndrome and First Episode Psychosis: A Case Report. Because of γ-Aminobutyric Acid-Glutamate Imbalance, Gut Microbiota, or Both? Delirious Mania Induced by Ciprofloxacin Use: A Case Report and Review of the Literature. DSM-5-TR Clinical Cases. Evaluative Research on Psychodynamic Therapy: Foundations and Recent Advances. How Quickly Multiple Medication Use Can Start: A Medication for Every Complaint on the First Visit Compromising the Ability to Determine Cause and Effect.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1