Trail Making Test: Comparison of paper-and-pencil and electronic versions.

The Trail Making Test (TMT) was adapted for the iPad by Parker-O'Brien, which uses the 2004 Tombaugh norms. This study investigated the equivalency of this electronic test by (a) examining the test-retest reliability of the iPad-TMT, and (b) calculating the concurrent validity between the two versions. The sample included 77 healthy adults. Reliability was assessed by Pearson product-moment correlation and intraclass correlation coefficient, while validity was assessed by MANOVA. Results indicate that Part A of the iPad-TMT did not demonstrate adequate test-retest reliability over 1 week (r = 0.15-0.70); Part B demonstrated adequate test-retest reliability in the majority of groups (r = 0.33-0.80). Conversely, Part A of the electronic TMT demonstrated adequate concurrent validity, whereas Part B did not; however, validity in Part A has minimal significance without adequate reliability. Handedness had a significant effect on performance, with left-handers performing slower on the electronic TMT Part A (p < .05) and the traditional TMT Part B (p < .05). Clinicians should use caution when using electronic versions of traditional tests, as they may assess different constructs. New norms should be developed. The role of handedness on TMT performance should be further assessed.

Trauma in people with intellectual and developmental disabilities: reactions of parents and caregivers to research participation.

Generally, studies have revealed that only a minority of people are bothered by participation in research on traumatic stress. Severity of traumatic events and subsequent responses are typically unrelated to negative reactions. We included 386 family members and caregivers (respondents) of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (focus people). Focus people (ages 4-82) had a wide range of physical and intellectual disabilities, medical and behavioral problems, and exposure to potentially traumatic events. The measures of impact of research participation (based on J. I. Ruzek & D. F. Zatzick's [2000] Reactions to Research Participation Questionnaire [RRPQ]; S. Folkman and R. S. Lazarus's [1986 , 1988 ] Emotional Responses to Participation Scale) showed good psychometric properties. Response to participation was highly skewed toward good understanding of informed consent, valuing participation, and minimal negative reactions. Number of traumatic events was related, positively, to only one RRPQ subscale: Valuing Participation. Implications for research and clinical work are discussed.