Neuropsychological assessment, intervention, and best practices for women with non-Central nervous system cancer: A scoping review of current standards.

Objective: Existing literature has sought to characterize the broad cognitive impact of non-central nervous system cancer and its treatment, including chemotherapy, radiation, surgery, and hormonal regulation. However, despite the frequency of women that are diagnosed with breast and gynecological cancer, there is limited research on the specific cognitive experiences of women undergoing cancer treatment. Presently, the current literature lacks concise guidance for neuropsychologists to support the cognitive health of women facing cancer, despite the acknowledged impact of cancer interventions and chronic illness on cognitive outcomes. Method: Applying scoping review criteria outlined by Peters et al. (2015) and adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, we conducted a comprehensive examination of literature spanning multiple databases (Google Scholar, PubMed, PsychINFO) with a focus on the cognitive impact of cancer treatment on women. Conclusions: Women are subject to unique treatment-related outcomes due to the impact of hormonal alterations, differences in metabolization of certain chemotherapies, and psychosocial risk factors. Despite the known impact of cancer intervention, chronic illness, and cancer-related sequelae on cognitive outcomes, the current literature does not parsimoniously outline best practices for neuropsychologists to promote the health of women experiencing cancer. The current paper (1) provides an overview of the cognitive implications of cancer treatment with an intentional focus on cancers that are more prevalent in women versus men, (2) addresses the characteristics of this impact for women undergoing cancer intervention(s), and (3) provides possible intervention and treatment strategies for mental health providers and neuropsychologists.

The Impact of Adverse Childhood Experiences on Symptom and Performance Validity Tests Among a Multiracial Sample Presenting for ADHD Evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are commonly reported in individuals presenting for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) evaluation. Performance validity tests (PVTs) and symptom validity tests (SVTs) are essential to ADHD evaluations in young adults, but extant research suggests that those who report ACEs may be inaccurately classified as invalid on these measures. The current study aimed to assess the degree to which ACE exposure differentiated PVT and SVT performance and ADHD symptom reporting in a multi-racial sample of adults presenting for ADHD evaluation. METHOD: This study included 170 adults referred for outpatient neuropsychological ADHD evaluation who completed the ACE Checklist and a neurocognitive battery that included multiple PVTs and SVTs. Analysis of variance was used to examine differences in PVT and SVT performance among those with high (≥4) and low (≤3) reported ACEs. RESULTS: Main effects of the ACE group were observed, such that high ACE group reporting demonstrated higher scores on SVTs assessing ADHD symptom over-reporting and infrequent psychiatric and somatic symptoms on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form. Conversely, no significant differences emerged in total PVT failures across ACE groups. CONCLUSIONS: Those with high ACE exposure were more likely to have higher scores on SVTs assessing over-reporting and infrequent responses. In contrast, ACE exposure did not affect PVT performance. Thus, ACE exposure should be considered specifically when evaluating SVT performance in the context of ADHD evaluations, and more work is needed to understand factors that contribute to different patterns of symptom reporting as a function of ACE exposure.

Exploring Subfactors of Adult Cognitive Disengagement Syndrome and Impact on Neuropsychological Performance.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated subfactors of cognitive disengagement syndrome (CDS; previously referred as sluggish cognitive tempo) among adults referred for neuropsychological evaluation of attentiondeficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHOD: Retrospective analyses of data from 164 outpatient neuropsychological evaluations examined associations between CDS subfactors and self-reported psychological symptoms and cognitive performance. RESULTS: Factor analysis produced two distinct but positively correlated constructs: "Cognitive Complaints'' and "Lethargy." Both correlated positively with symptom reports (rs = 0.26-0.57). Cognitive Complaints correlated negatively with working memory, processing speed, and executive functioning performance (rs = -0.21 to -0.37), whereas Lethargy correlated negatively only with processing speed and executive functioning performance (rs = -0.26 to -0.42). Both predicted depression symptoms, but only Cognitive Complaints predicted inattention symptoms. Both subfactors demonstrated modest to nonsignificant associations with cognitive performance after accounting for estimated premorbid intelligence and inattention. CONCLUSION: Findings indicate a bidimensional conceptualization of CDS, with differential associations between its constituent subfactors, reported symptoms, and cognitive performance.

Multivariate examination of embedded indicators of performance validity for ADHD evaluations: A targeted approach.

This study investigated the individual and combined utility of 10 embedded validity indicators (EVIs) within executive functioning, attention/working memory, and processing speed measures in 585 adults referred for an attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) evaluation. Participants were categorized into invalid and valid performance groups as determined by scores from empirical performance validity indicators. Analyses revealed that all of the EVIs could meaningfully discriminate invalid from valid performers (AUCs = .69-.78), with high specificity (≥90%) but low sensitivity (19%-51%). However, none of them explained more than 20% of the variance in validity status. Combining any of these 10 EVIs into a multivariate model significantly improved classification accuracy, explaining up to 36% of the variance in validity status. Integrating six EVIs from the Stroop Color and Word Test, Trail Making Test, Verbal Fluency Test, and Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth Edition was as efficacious (AUC = .86) as using all 10 EVIs together. Failing any two of these six EVIs or any three of the 10 EVIs yielded clinically acceptable specificity (≥90%) with moderate sensitivity (60%). Findings support the use of multivariate models to improve the identification of performance invalidity in ADHD evaluations, but chaining multiple EVIs may only be helpful to an extent.