Kaitlyn Abeare, Laura Cutler, Kelly Y An, Parveen Razvi, Matthew Holcomb, Laszlo A Erdodi
{"title":"BNT-15: Revised Performance Validity Cutoffs and Proposed Clinical Classification Ranges.","authors":"Kaitlyn Abeare, Laura Cutler, Kelly Y An, Parveen Razvi, Matthew Holcomb, Laszlo A Erdodi","doi":"10.1097/WNN.0000000000000304","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Abbreviated neurocognitive tests offer a practical alternative to full-length versions but often lack clear interpretive guidelines, thereby limiting their clinical utility.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To replicate validity cutoffs for the Boston Naming Test-Short Form (BNT-15) and to introduce a clinical classification system for the BNT-15 as a measure of object-naming skills.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We collected data from 43 university students and 46 clinical patients. Classification accuracy was computed against psychometrically defined criterion groups. Clinical classification ranges were developed using a z -score transformation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Previously suggested validity cutoffs (≤11 and ≤12) produced comparable classification accuracy among the university students. However, a more conservative cutoff (≤10) was needed with the clinical patients to contain the false-positive rate (0.20-0.38 sensitivity at 0.92-0.96 specificity). As a measure of cognitive ability, a perfect BNT-15 score suggests above average performance; ≤11 suggests clinically significant deficits. Demographically adjusted prorated BNT-15 T-scores correlated strongly (0.86) with the newly developed z -scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Given its brevity (<5 minutes), ease of administration and scoring, the BNT-15 can function as a useful and cost-effective screening measure for both object-naming/English proficiency and performance validity. The proposed clinical classification ranges provide useful guidelines for practitioners.</p>","PeriodicalId":50671,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology","volume":"35 3","pages":"155-168"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/WNN.0000000000000304","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9
Abstract
Background: Abbreviated neurocognitive tests offer a practical alternative to full-length versions but often lack clear interpretive guidelines, thereby limiting their clinical utility.
Objective: To replicate validity cutoffs for the Boston Naming Test-Short Form (BNT-15) and to introduce a clinical classification system for the BNT-15 as a measure of object-naming skills.
Method: We collected data from 43 university students and 46 clinical patients. Classification accuracy was computed against psychometrically defined criterion groups. Clinical classification ranges were developed using a z -score transformation.
Results: Previously suggested validity cutoffs (≤11 and ≤12) produced comparable classification accuracy among the university students. However, a more conservative cutoff (≤10) was needed with the clinical patients to contain the false-positive rate (0.20-0.38 sensitivity at 0.92-0.96 specificity). As a measure of cognitive ability, a perfect BNT-15 score suggests above average performance; ≤11 suggests clinically significant deficits. Demographically adjusted prorated BNT-15 T-scores correlated strongly (0.86) with the newly developed z -scores.
Conclusion: Given its brevity (<5 minutes), ease of administration and scoring, the BNT-15 can function as a useful and cost-effective screening measure for both object-naming/English proficiency and performance validity. The proposed clinical classification ranges provide useful guidelines for practitioners.
期刊介绍:
Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology (CBN) is a forum for advances in the neurologic understanding and possible treatment of human disorders that affect thinking, learning, memory, communication, and behavior. As an incubator for innovations in these fields, CBN helps transform theory into practice. The journal serves clinical research, patient care, education, and professional advancement.
The journal welcomes contributions from neurology, cognitive neuroscience, neuropsychology, neuropsychiatry, and other relevant fields. The editors particularly encourage review articles (including reviews of clinical practice), experimental and observational case reports, instructional articles for interested students and professionals in other fields, and innovative articles that do not fit neatly into any category. Also welcome are therapeutic trials and other experimental and observational studies, brief reports, first-person accounts of neurologic experiences, position papers, hypotheses, opinion papers, commentaries, historical perspectives, and book reviews.