The relationship between performance validity Test failure, fatigue, and psychological functioning in Long COVID.

IF 3 3区 心理学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Clinical Neuropsychologist Pub Date : 2025-03-08 DOI:10.1080/13854046.2025.2476798
Greta N Minor, Olivia R Kessler, Laura Fry, Brooke Huizenga, Sara Johnson, Savana M Naini, Chen Shen, Sophie J Wiitala, Michael R Basso, Courtney L Eskridge, Erin Holker, Allison M Logemann, Eric J Waldron, Douglas M Whiteside
{"title":"The relationship between performance validity Test failure, fatigue, and psychological functioning in Long COVID.","authors":"Greta N Minor, Olivia R Kessler, Laura Fry, Brooke Huizenga, Sara Johnson, Savana M Naini, Chen Shen, Sophie J Wiitala, Michael R Basso, Courtney L Eskridge, Erin Holker, Allison M Logemann, Eric J Waldron, Douglas M Whiteside","doi":"10.1080/13854046.2025.2476798","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> At times, patients with Long COVID fail performance validity tests (PVTs) for cognitive measures and symptom validity tests (SVTs) embedded in formal personality measures. This is the first study, to our knowledge, to examine whether self-reported symptoms on the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) and the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS) were related to performance validity in Long COVID patients. <b>Method:</b> Participants were 175 individuals diagnosed with Long COVID who completed four PVTs, the MFIS, and the PAI. There was evidence for nots based on medical records review for 25.71% of the patients. Based on PVT performances, patients were assigned to one of three groups: Pass group (no PVT failures), Intermediate group (1 PVT failure), or Fail group (2+ PVT failures). <b>Results:</b> 84.57% of participants were in the Pass group, 9.14% in the Intermediate group, and 6.29% in the Fail group. There was a not a significant difference in external incentive frequency between groups. Only one significant group difference on the PAI scales and subscales was found, with slightly greater somatization symptoms (SOM-S) reported in the Fail group relative to the Pass group (<i>η<sup>2</sup></i> = .03). The MFIS was not significantly different between groups. <b>Conclusions:</b> These findings suggest that PVT failure is not associated with fatigue or PAI responses, except on the somatization subscale.</p>","PeriodicalId":55250,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Neuropsychologist","volume":" ","pages":"1-16"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Neuropsychologist","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2025.2476798","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: At times, patients with Long COVID fail performance validity tests (PVTs) for cognitive measures and symptom validity tests (SVTs) embedded in formal personality measures. This is the first study, to our knowledge, to examine whether self-reported symptoms on the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) and the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS) were related to performance validity in Long COVID patients. Method: Participants were 175 individuals diagnosed with Long COVID who completed four PVTs, the MFIS, and the PAI. There was evidence for nots based on medical records review for 25.71% of the patients. Based on PVT performances, patients were assigned to one of three groups: Pass group (no PVT failures), Intermediate group (1 PVT failure), or Fail group (2+ PVT failures). Results: 84.57% of participants were in the Pass group, 9.14% in the Intermediate group, and 6.29% in the Fail group. There was a not a significant difference in external incentive frequency between groups. Only one significant group difference on the PAI scales and subscales was found, with slightly greater somatization symptoms (SOM-S) reported in the Fail group relative to the Pass group (η2 = .03). The MFIS was not significantly different between groups. Conclusions: These findings suggest that PVT failure is not associated with fatigue or PAI responses, except on the somatization subscale.

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Neuropsychologist
Clinical Neuropsychologist 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
12.80%
发文量
61
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Clinical Neuropsychologist (TCN) serves as the premier forum for (1) state-of-the-art clinically-relevant scientific research, (2) in-depth professional discussions of matters germane to evidence-based practice, and (3) clinical case studies in neuropsychology. Of particular interest are papers that can make definitive statements about a given topic (thereby having implications for the standards of clinical practice) and those with the potential to expand today’s clinical frontiers. Research on all age groups, and on both clinical and normal populations, is considered.
期刊最新文献
Mayo Normative Studies: regression-based normative data for remote self-administration of the Stricker Learning Span, Symbols Test, and Mayo Test Drive Screening Battery Composite and validation in individuals with mild cognitive impairment and dementia. The relationship between performance validity Test failure, fatigue, and psychological functioning in Long COVID. Adapting the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised with Semantic Cues: Assessing diagnostic utility in a Spanish clinical population. New regression-based norms for the Trail Making Test on Norwegian older adults: Understanding the effect of education. Ability of the D-KEFS Color-Word Interference Test as an embedded measure to identify noncredible neurocognitive performance in personal injury litigants.
×
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