Adverse childhood experiences, cognitive functioning, depression, and anxiety in adulthood.

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) predict cognitive dysfunction, possibly through direct (e.g., brain structure/function changes) and indirect (e.g., increased psychopathology risk) pathways. However, extant studies have focused on young and older adults, with limited understanding of how ACEs affect cognitive health in midadulthood. OBJECTIVE: This study compared psychiatric and cognitive differences between adults at high- and low-risk of adverse health outcomes based on the ACE risk classification scheme. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Adult patients (N = 211; 46.9% female; Mage = 44.1, SD = 17.1; Meducation = 13.8, SD = 3.0) consecutively referred for outpatient neuropsychological evaluation within a large, Midwestern academic medical center. METHOD: Patients were divided into high and low ACE groups based on the number of ACEs endorsed. Subsequently, a series of one-way analyses of variances were conducted to compare high versus low ACE groups on the Test of Premorbid Functioning, Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth Edition Digit Span Test, Trail Making Test-Parts A and B, Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, Beck Depression Inventory-II, and Beck Anxiety Inventory scores. RESULTS: Significant group differences were detected for anxiety and depression with the high ACE group endorsing significantly greater depression and anxiety symptoms relative to the low ACE group. High and low ACE groups did not significantly differ on any cognitive measures. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that an individual's psychological health, but not cognitive functioning, is impacted by the level of ACE exposure. Study findings highlight the importance of including ACE measures in neuropsychological evaluations, as it will aid in case conceptualization and tailoring treatment recommendations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Comprehensive Analysis of MMPI-2-RF Symptom Validity Scales and Performance Validity Test Relationships in a Diverse Mixed Neuropsychiatric Setting.

The utility of symptom (SVT) and performance (PVT) validity tests has been independently established in neuropsychological evaluations, yet research on the relationship between these two types of validity indices is limited to circumscribed populations and measures. This study examined the relationship between SVTs on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) and PVTs in a mixed neuropsychiatric setting. This cross-sectional study included data from 181 diagnostically and demographically diverse patients with neuropsychiatric conditions referred for outpatient clinical neuropsychological evaluation at an academic medical center. All patients were administered a uniform neuropsychological battery, including the MMPI-2-RF and five PVTs (i.e., Dot Counting Test; Medical Symptom Validity Test; Reliable Digit Span; Test of Memory Malingering-Trial 1; Word Choice Test). Nonsignificant associations emerged between SVT and PVT performance. Although the Response Bias Scale was most predictive of PVT performance, MMPI-2-RF SVTs generally had low classification accuracy for predicting PVT performance. Neuropsychological test performance was related to MMPI-2-RF SVT status only when overreporting elevations were at extreme scores. The current study further supports that SVTs and PVTs measure unique and dissociable constructs among diverse patients with neuropsychiatric conditions, consistent with literature from other clinical contexts. Therefore, objective evidence of symptom overreporting on MMPI-2-RF SVTs cannot be interpreted as definitively indicating invalid performance on tests of neurocognitive abilities. As such, clinicians should include both SVTs and PVTs as part of a comprehensive neuropsychological evaluation as they provide unique information regarding performance and symptom validity.

Cross-validating the Clinical Assessment of Attention Deficit-Adult symptom validity scales for assessment of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder in adults.

INTRODUCTION: The Clinical Assessment of Attention Deficit-Adult is among the few questionnaires that offer validity indicators (i.e., Negative Impression [NI], Infrequency [IF], and Positive Impression [PI]) for classifying underreporting and overreporting of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms. This is the first study to cross-validate the NI, IF, and PI scales in a sample of adults with suspected or known ADHD. METHOD: Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to examine the independent and combined value of the NI, IF, and PI scores in predicting invalid symptom reporting and neurocognitive performance in a sample of 543 adults undergoing ADHD evaluation. RESULTS: The NI scale demonstrated better classification accuracy than the IF scale in discriminating patients with and without valid scores on measures of overreporting. Only NI scores significantly predicted validity status when used in combination with IF scores. Optimal cut-scores for the NI (≤51; 30% sensitivity / 90% specificity) and IF (≥4; 18% sensitivity / 90% specificity) scales were consistent with those reported in the original manual; however, these indicators poorly discriminated patients with invalid and valid neurocognitive performance. The PI scale demonstrated acceptable classification accuracy in discriminating patients with invalid and valid scores on measures of underreporting, albeit with an optimal cut-score (≥27; 36% sensitivity / 90% specificity) lower than that described in the manual. CONCLUSION: Findings provide preliminary evidence of construct validity for these scales as embedded validity indicators of symptom overreporting and underreporting. However, these scales should not be used to guide clinical judgment regarding the validity of neurocognitive test performance.

"Benign" tremor? A serial case report of 2.5 year progression from mild cognitive impairment to amnestic dementia following deep brain stimulator placement for essential tremor.

Essential tremor (ET) is a prevalent neurological disorder with associated neuropsychological sequalae. Although cognitive deficits associated with ET are traditionally conceptualized as attention, processing speed, and executive impairments attributed to underlying frontal-subcortical dysfunction, emerging literature highlights the elevated frequency of progressive amnestic memory impairments in patients with ET. This case study centers around a 75-year-old woman with a 15-year history of ET who underwent deep brain stimulation (DBS) as well as three neuropsychological evaluations, one pre-surgically and two post-surgically at one and two-years post successful DBS surgery. Neuropsychological evaluation results revealed circumscribed mild and variable memory deficits pre-surgically and one-year post-surgically, However, two-years post-DBS, reliable change indices revealed significant declines in verbal/visual memory, consistent with an amnestic presentation, in addition to executive functions, aspects of higher-level language abilities, and overall IQ. This case study adds to a growing literature identifying a subset of ET patients with a neurodegenerative cognitive trajectory characterized by progressive, amnestic memory impairment. The case also highlights the importance of serial monitoring of cognition beyond the pre-surgical DBS workup to monitor for clinically significant decline(s).

A comparison of embedded validity indicators from the Stroop Color and Word Test among adults referred for clinical evaluation of suspected or confirmed attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

This study investigated the utility of four Stroop Color and Word Test (SCWT) indices, including the raw score and T score for the word reading (WR) and color naming (CN) trials, as embedded performance validity tests (PVTs) within a sample referred for evaluation of suspected or known attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Data were analyzed from a final sample of 317 patients consecutively referred for ADHD evaluation, which was divided into groups with invalid (n = 43; 14%) and valid neuropsychological test performance (n = 274; 86%). A subset of the valid group with confirmed ADHD diagnoses (n = 226; 71%) were also analyzed separately. Classification accuracy for the overall valid sample was in the acceptable range (AUCs = .757-.794), with optimal cut scores of WR raw ≤75 (54% sensitivity/90% specificity), WR T score ≤ 28 (54% sensitivity/88% specificity), CN raw ≤57 (42% sensitivity/90% specificity), and CN T score ≤ 30 (40% sensitivity/90% specificity). Classification accuracy was also in the acceptable range for the ADHD-confirmed subgroup (AUCs = .750-.790), with optimal cut scores of WR Raw ≤ 75 (54% sensitivity/89% specificity), WR T score ≤ 28 (54% sensitivity/87% specificity), CN Raw ≤ 57 (42% sensitivity/90% specificity), and CN T score ≤ 30 (40% sensitivity/90% specificity). These findings indicate that embedded PVTs derived from the SCWT, particularly those derived from the WR trial, are effective measures for determining validity status in samples with suspected or confirmed ADHD. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

The relationship between neuropsychological dispersion, processing speed and memory after electrical injury.

Introduction: Previous studies of neuropsychological performance in electrical injury (EI) patients have produced evidence of deficits in various cognitive domains, but studies have yet to investigate relationships among performance in cognitive domains post-EI. This study examined whether dispersion among neuropsychological test scores was associated with injury parameters and neuropsychological performance in EI patients. Additionally, we examined whether dispersion, processing speed and/or executive abilities explain variance in episodic verbal and visual memory performance among EI patients.Method: Data from 52 post-acute EI patients undergoing outpatient evaluation with objectively-verified valid neuropsychological test performance were examined. Tests included measures of verbal and visual memory, processing speed, and executive functioning. Dispersion was calculated from executive functioning and processing speed scores.Results: Dispersion was not related to mean performance or injury characteristics, but was significantly negatively correlated with performance on a test of processing speed, suggesting that increased dispersion is associated with reduced cognitive efficiency post-EI. Delayed visual memory was related to both dispersion scores and processing speed. Stepwise regression equations predicting delayed memory determined that processing speed most significantly predicted delayed visual memory, even after controlling for immediate visual memory. No significant relationships emerged between verbal memory and non-memory neuropsychological scores.Conclusions: This is the first study to examine neuropsychological dispersion and relationships among domains of cognitive functioning in EI. Current results suggested that neuropsychological dispersion is not a marker of general functioning or severity of injury in EI patients, but may represent more specific processing speed abilities. Processing speed predicts delayed visual memory performance in EI patients, which should be considered in interpreting test scores during evaluations.

Establishing the base rate of performance invalidity in a clinical electrical injury sample: Implications for neuropsychological test performance.

Objective: The base rate of neuropsychological performance invalidity in electrical injury, a clinically-distinct and frequently compensation-seeking population, is not well established. This study determined the base rate of performance invalidity in a large electrical injury sample, and examined patient characteristics, injury parameters, and neuropsychological test performance based on validity status.Method: This cross-sectional study included data from 101 patients with electrical injury consecutively referred for post-acute neuropsychological evaluation. Eighty-five percent of the sample was compensation-seeking. Multiple performance validity tests (PVTs) were administered as part of standard clinical evaluation. For patients with four or more PVTs, valid performance was operationalized as less than or equal to one PVT failure and invalid performance as two or more failures.Results: Frequency analysis revealed 66% (n = 67) had valid performance while 29% (n = 29) demonstrated probable invalid performance; the remaining 5% (n = 5) had indeterminate validity. No significant differences in demographics or injury parameters emerged between validity groups (0 vs. 1 vs. ≥2 PVT failures). In contrast, the electrical injury group with invalid performance performed significantly worse across tests of processing speed and executive abilities than those with valid performance (ps< .05, ηp2 = .19-.25).Conclusions: The current study is the first to establish the base rate of neuropsychological performance invalidity in electrical injury survivors using empirical methods and current practice standards. Patient and clinical variables, including compensation-seeking status, did not differ between validity groups; however, neuropsychological test performance did, supporting the need for multi-method, objective performance validity assessment.

Examining Conners Continuous Performance Test-3 (CPT-3) Embedded Performance Validity Indicators in an Adult Clinical Sample Referred for ADHD Evaluation.

This study evaluated multiple previously-identified Continuous Performance Test-Third Edition (CPT-3) scores as embedded validity indicators (EVIs) among 201 adults undergoing neuropsychological evaluation for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) divided into valid (n = 169) and invalid (n = 32) groups based on seven criterion measures. Although 6/10 CPT-3 scores accurately detected invalidity, only two reached minimally acceptable classification accuracy of ≥0.70. The remaining four had unacceptably low accuracy (AUCs = 0.62-0.69) with 0.19-0.41 sensitivity at ≥0.90 specificity. Composite scores did not provide better classification accuracy than individual CPT-3 scores. In sum, CPT-3 individual and composite scores generally are not accurate PVTs among adults undergoing clinical evaluation for ADHD.