Cognitive, Sleep-Arousal, Physical, and Affective Domain Scores on the Post-Concussion Symptom Scale: Added Utility in Detecting Symptom Elevations among Student-Athletes with a Remote History of Concussion.

OBJECTIVE: The evaluation of self-reported symptoms is a standard component of concussion assessment and management. Clinicians typically evaluate a total symptom severity score rather than scores corresponding to specific symptom domains (i.e., cognitive, sleep-arousal, physical, and affective symptoms). This study examined (i) whether elevations in specific symptom domains would be missed when interpreting only the total symptom severity score and (ii) if a single symptom domain elevation was more common than having elevated symptoms across multiple domains. METHOD: Adolescent student-athletes (N = 1,008) with concussion history (i.e., ≥6 months since last concussion) completed the Post-Concussion Symptom Scale (PCSS). The PCSS total score and cognitive, sleep-arousal, physical, and affective domain scores were calculated. To determine if symptoms were elevated, scores were compared to normative data matched on gender and pre-existing conditions, with scores considered elevated if they were ≥84th percentile. The frequency of total and domain score elevations were calculated and stratified by gender and number of prior concussions (i.e., 1 or ≥2 prior concussions). RESULTS: Overall, 26% of student-athletes had an elevated symptom domain score without being elevated on the total score. The most common symptom presentation was to have a single elevated symptom domain (21%), followed by two (11%), three (8%), or four elevated domains (6%). CONCLUSIONS: Interpreting PCSS symptom domains may be beneficial in detecting student-athletes with elevated symptoms following a remote concussion. Roughly a quarter of student-athletes have domain-specific symptom elevations that would be missed by interpreting the total score alone.

The Post-Concussion Symptom Scale: Normative Data for Adolescent Student-Athletes Stratified by Gender and Preexisting Conditions.

BACKGROUND: The Post-Concussion Symptom Scale (PCSS) is a self-report questionnaire measuring symptoms that commonly occur after a concussion; however, these symptoms are nonspecific and can be related to co-occurring orthopaedic injuries (eg, cervical strain) or patient characteristics and preexisting conditions, even in the absence of a recent injury. As such, clinicians may have difficulty determining whether symptom elevations are attributable to a recent concussion as opposed to a confounding injury or a preexisting condition, which may be especially difficult when preinjury baseline symptom data are unavailable. PURPOSE: This study aimed to further validate the 4-factor model of the PCSS (ie, cognitive, sleep-arousal, physical, and affective symptoms) with adolescent student-athletes and provide normative reference data for each factor and the total score, stratified by gender and preexisting health conditions. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Participants were 9358 adolescent student-athletes who completed the PCSS during a preseason baseline evaluation (mean age, 14.9 years; SD, 1.3 years [range, 13-18 years]; 49.3% boys). The 4-factor model of the PCSS was tested for the full sample and separately for boys and girls using confirmatory factor analysis. Symptom severity percentiles were created for the PCSS total score and each factor, stratified by gender and preexisting conditions (ie, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, mental health history, headache/migraine history, learning disability/dyslexia, academic problems, and concussion history). RESULTS: The 4-factor model of the PCSS replicated in the full sample (comparative fit index [CFI] = 0.959) and in both gender groups (boys: CFI = 0.961; girls: CFI = 0.960). The total PCSS score at the 84th percentile varied by preexisting conditions as follows: healthy participants = 8, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder = 18, mental health history = 26, headache/migraine history = 18, learning disability = 19, and academic problems = 17. On all PCSS subscales, participants with a mental health history had the highest scores, and high scores were associated with having >1 preexisting condition. Girls had higher scores than boys for each stratification. CONCLUSION: The 4-factor model of the PCSS replicates for adolescent student-athletes. Gender, number of preexisting conditions, and mental health history are important factors to account for when interpreting PCSS symptom severity. The normative data provided herein could assist clinicians in determining whether an adolescent student-athlete is presenting with persistent postconcussion symptoms or a typical symptom experience based on their gender and personal health history.

Early bird fails the PVT? The effects of timing artifacts on performance validity tests.

This study was designed to investigate the effects of timing on the likelihood of failing the Recognition Memory Test-Words (RMT) and Word Choice Test (WCT). The RMT and WCT were administered in counterbalanced order either at the beginning (Time 1) or at the end (Time 2) of a test battery to a mixed clinical sample of 196 patients (Mage = 44.5 years, 55.1% female) medically referred for neuropsychological evaluation. The risk of failing the accuracy score was higher at Time 1 on both the RMT (relative risk [RR]: 1.44-1.64) and the WCT (RR: 1.21-1.50) across a range of cutoffs. Likewise, the risk of failing the time-to-completion score was higher at Time 1 on both the RMT (RR: 1.30-1.94) and the WCT (RR: 1.58-3.75). Established cutoffs failed to reach specificity standards at Time 1; more liberal cutoffs cleared specificity thresholds at Time 2. According to our findings, the RMT and WCT may be prone to false-positive errors at Time 1. Conversely, when administered at Time 2, existing cutoffs may have lower sensitivity, but they are highly specific to invalid performance. Timing should be considered during both test selection and the interpretation of RMT and WCT scores. Using conservative cutoffs for morning administrations and liberal cutoffs for afternoon administrations may be necessary to neutralize timing artifacts. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Prevalence of Invalid Performance on Baseline Testing for Sport-Related Concussion by Age and Validity Indicator.

Importance: Estimated base rates of invalid performance on baseline testing (base rates of failure) for the management of sport-related concussion range from 6.1% to 40.0%, depending on the validity indicator used. The instability of this key measure represents a challenge in the clinical interpretation of test results that could undermine the utility of baseline testing. Objectives: To determine the prevalence of invalid performance on baseline testing and to assess whether the prevalence varies as a function of age and validity indicator. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, cross-sectional study included data collected between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2016, from a clinical referral center in the Midwestern United States. Participants included 7897 consecutively tested, equivalently proportioned male and female athletes aged 10 to 21 years, who completed baseline neurocognitive testing for the purpose of concussion management. Interventions: Baseline assessment was conducted with the Immediate Postconcussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT), a computerized neurocognitive test designed for assessment of concussion. Main Outcomes and Measures: Base rates of failure on published ImPACT validity indicators were compared within and across age groups. Hypotheses were developed after data collection but prior to analyses. Results: Of the 7897 study participants, 4086 (51.7%) were male, mean (SD) age was 14.71 (1.78) years, 7820 (99.0%) were primarily English speaking, and the mean (SD) educational level was 8.79 (1.68) years. The base rate of failure ranged from 6.4% to 47.6% across individual indicators. Most of the sample (55.7%) failed at least 1 of 4 validity indicators. The base rate of failure varied considerably across age groups (117 of 140 [83.6%] for those aged 10 years to 14 of 48 [29.2%] for those aged 21 years), representing a risk ratio of 2.86 (95% CI, 2.60-3.16; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: The results for base rate of failure were surprisingly high overall and varied widely depending on the specific validity indicator and the age of the examinee. The strong age association, with 3 of 4 participants aged 10 to 12 years failing validity indicators, suggests that the clinical interpretation and utility of baseline testing in this age group is questionable. These findings underscore the need for close scrutiny of performance validity indicators on baseline testing across age groups.

The Stroop test as a measure of performance validity in adults clinically referred for neuropsychological assessment.

This study was designed to develop performance validity indicators embedded within the Delis-Kaplan Executive Function Systems (D-KEFS) version of the Stroop task. Archival data from a mixed clinical sample of 132 patients (50% male; MAge = 43.4; MEducation = 14.1) clinically referred for neuropsychological assessment were analyzed. Criterion measures included the Warrington Recognition Memory Test-Words and 2 composites based on several independent validity indicators. An age-corrected scaled score ≤6 on any of the 4 trials reliably differentiated psychometrically defined credible and noncredible response sets with high specificity (.87-.94) and variable sensitivity (.34-.71). An inverted Stroop effect was less sensitive (.14-.29), but comparably specific (.85-90) to invalid performance. Aggregating the newly developed D-KEFS Stroop validity indicators further improved classification accuracy. Failing the validity cutoffs was unrelated to self-reported depression or anxiety. However, it was associated with elevated somatic symptom report. In addition to processing speed and executive function, the D-KEFS version of the Stroop task can function as a measure of performance validity. A multivariate approach to performance validity assessment is generally superior to univariate models. (PsycINFO Database Record

Utility of critical items within the Recognition Memory Test and Word Choice Test.

This study was designed to examine the clinical utility of critical items within the Recognition Memory Test (RMT) and the Word Choice Test (WCT). Archival data were collected from a mixed clinical sample of 202 patients clinically referred for neuropsychological testing (54.5% male; mean age = 45.3 years; mean level of education = 13.9 years). The credibility of a given response set was psychometrically defined using three separate composite measures, each of which was based on multiple independent performance validity indicators. Critical items improved the classification accuracy of both tests. They increased sensitivity by correctly identifying an additional 2-17% of the invalid response sets that passed the traditional cutoffs based on total score. They also increased specificity by providing additional evidence of noncredible performance in response sets that failed the total score cutoff. The combination of failing the traditional cutoff, but passing critical items was associated with increased risk of misclassifying the response set as invalid. Critical item analysis enhances the diagnostic power of both the RMT and WCT. Given that critical items require no additional test material or administration time, but help reduce both false positive and false negative errors, they represent a versatile, valuable, and time- and cost-effective supplement to performance validity assessment.

The power of timing: Adding a time-to-completion cutoff to the Word Choice Test and Recognition Memory Test improves classification accuracy.

INTRODUCTION: The Recognition Memory Test (RMT) and Word Choice Test (WCT) are structurally similar, but psychometrically different. Previous research demonstrated that adding a time-to-completion cutoff improved the classification accuracy of the RMT. However, the contribution of WCT time-cutoffs to improve the detection of invalid responding has not been investigated. The present study was designed to evaluate the classification accuracy of time-to-completion on the WCT compared to the accuracy score and the RMT. METHOD: Both tests were administered to 202 adults (Mage = 45.3 years, SD = 16.8; 54.5% female) clinically referred for neuropsychological assessment in counterbalanced order as part of a larger battery of cognitive tests. RESULTS: Participants obtained lower and more variable scores on the RMT (M = 44.1, SD = 7.6) than on the WCT (M = 46.9, SD = 5.7). Similarly, they took longer to complete the recognition trial on the RMT (M = 157.2 s,SD = 71.8) than the WCT (M = 137.2 s, SD = 75.7). The optimal cutoff on the RMT (≤43) produced .60 sensitivity at .87 specificity. The optimal cutoff on the WCT (≤47) produced .57 sensitivity at .87 specificity. Time-cutoffs produced comparable classification accuracies for both RMT (≥192 s; .48 sensitivity at .88 specificity) and WCT (≥171 s; .49 sensitivity at .91 specificity). They also identified an additional 6-10% of the invalid profiles missed by accuracy score cutoffs, while maintaining good specificity (.93-.95). Functional equivalence was reached at accuracy scores ≤43 (RMT) and ≤47 (WCT) or time-to-completion ≥192 s (RMT) and ≥171 s (WCT). CONCLUSIONS: Time-to-completion cutoffs are valuable additions to both tests. They can function as independent validity indicators or enhance the sensitivity of accuracy scores without requiring additional measures or extending standard administration time.

Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV) processing speed scores as measures of noncredible responding: The third generation of embedded performance validity indicators.

Research suggests that select processing speed measures can also serve as embedded validity indicators (EVIs). The present study examined the diagnostic utility of Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV) subtests as EVIs in a mixed clinical sample of 205 patients medically referred for neuropsychological assessment (53.3% female, mean age = 45.1). Classification accuracy was calculated against 3 composite measures of performance validity as criterion variables. A PSI ≤79 produced a good combination of sensitivity (.23-.56) and specificity (.92-.98). A Coding scaled score ≤5 resulted in good specificity (.94-1.00), but low and variable sensitivity (.04-.28). A Symbol Search scaled score ≤6 achieved a good balance between sensitivity (.38-.64) and specificity (.88-.93). A Coding-Symbol Search scaled score difference ≥5 produced adequate specificity (.89-.91) but consistently low sensitivity (.08-.12). A 2-tailed cutoff on the Coding/Symbol Search raw score ratio (≤1.41 or ≥3.57) produced acceptable specificity (.87-.93), but low sensitivity (.15-.24). Failing ≥2 of these EVIs produced variable specificity (.81-.93) and sensitivity (.31-.59). Failing ≥3 of these EVIs stabilized specificity (.89-.94) at a small cost to sensitivity (.23-.53). Results suggest that processing speed based EVIs have the potential to provide a cost-effective and expedient method for evaluating the validity of cognitive data. Given their generally low and variable sensitivity, however, they should not be used in isolation to determine the credibility of a given response set. They also produced unacceptably high rates of false positive errors in patients with moderate-to-severe head injury. Combining evidence from multiple EVIs has the potential to improve overall classification accuracy. (PsycINFO Database Record