Journal of pediatric neuropsychology最新文献

The coronavirus pandemic identified a clinical need for pediatric tele-neuropsychology (TeleNP) assessment. However, due to limited research, clinicians have had little information to develop, adapt, or select reliable pediatric assessments for TeleNP. This preliminary systematic review aimed to examine the feasibility of pediatric TeleNP assessment alongside (1) patient/family acceptability, (2) reliability, and (3) the quality of the literature. Between May 2021 and November 2022, manual searches of PubMed, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar were conducted using terms related to "pediatric" and "tele-neuropsychology." After extracting relevant papers with samples aged 0-22 years, predefined exclusion criteria were applied. Quality assessment was completed using the AXIS appraisal tool (91% rater-agreement). Twenty-one studies were included in the review, with reported qualitative and quantitative data on the feasibility, reliability, and acceptability extracted. Across included studies, TeleNP was completed via telephone/video conference with participants either at home, in a local setting accompanied by an assistant, or in a different room but in the same building as the assessor. Pediatric TeleNP was generally reported to be feasible (e.g., minimal behavioral differences) and acceptable (e.g., positive feedback). Nineteen studies conducted some statistical analyses to assess reliability. Most observed no significant difference between in-person and TeleNP for most cognitive domains (i.e., IQ), with a minority finding variable reliability for some tests (e.g., attention, speech, visuo-spatial). Limited reporting of sex-assigned birth, racialized identity, and ethnicity reduced the quality and generalizability of the literature. To aid clinical interpretations, studies should assess underexamined cognitive domains (e.g., processing speed) with larger, more inclusive samples.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40817-023-00144-6.

Background: The present study examines impulsivity and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms as factors that may help understand the relationship between adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and adolescent binge drinking.

Methods: Data were drawn from a subset of adolescents (N = 285) ages 12-22 from the National Consortium on Alcohol & Neurodevelopment in Adolescence (NCANDA). Impulsivity and PTSD symptoms were each predicted to moderate the relationship between ACEs and binge drinking.

Results: The positive relationship between PTSD symptoms and binge drinking was stronger when impulsivity was included. The positive relationship between ACEs and binge drinking was also strengthened when accounting for PTSD symptoms.

Conclusion: Our results provide evidence that impulsivity and PTSD symptoms may increase the risk for binge drinking during adolescence, including following ACEs. Interventions targeting PTSD symptoms and impulsivity could be valuable tools in preventing adolescent binge drinking.

Generalizability considerations are widely discussed and a core foundation for understanding when and why treatment effects will replicate across sample demographics. However, guidelines on assessing and reporting generalizability-related factors differ across fields and are inconsistently applied. This paper synthesizes obstacles and best practices to apply recent work on measurement and sample diversity. We present a brief history of how knowledge in psychology has been constructed, with implications for who has been historically prioritized in research. We then review how generalizability remains a contemporary threat to neuropsychological assessment and outline best practices for researchers and clinical neuropsychologists. In doing so, we provide concrete tools to evaluate whether a given assessment is generalizable across populations and assist researchers in effectively testing and reporting treatment differences across sample demographics.