Olfactory and Neuropsychological Functioning in Olfactory Reference Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Olfactory reference syndrome (ORS) is an underrecognized, understudied, and often severe psychiatric disorder characterized by a prominent and distressing or impairing preoccupation with a false belief of emitting an offensive body odor. As this condition has only recently been recognized in the International Classification of Diseases (the 11th Edition), no empirical evidence exists about the underlying features and etiology of the disorder. OBJECTIVE: To examine the neuropsychological and olfactory functioning of individuals with ORS and address whether there is central nervous system or sensory dysfunction associated with the condition. METHODS: In this preliminary investigation, 9 consecutive participants with ORS completed a structured clinical interview and neuropsychological and olfaction evaluations. RESULTS: A proportion of individuals with ORS displayed deficits in aspects of cognitive functioning (i.e., processing speed, executive functioning, recognition memory bias for ORS-related words), olfaction functioning (i.e., odor detection and discrimination), and emotional processing. CONCLUSIONS: Based on these preliminary findings of cognitive, olfaction, and emotional processing deficits in individuals with ORS, further neuropsychological and olfaction studies are needed that better characterize this understudied patient group and address this study's limitations.

Trail-Making Test Part B: Evaluation of the Efficiency Score for Assessing Floor-Level Change in Veterans.

OBJECTIVE: The Trail Making Test - Part B (TMT-B) is a commonly used executive control measure with a known floor effect, limiting the ability to distinguish impairment among individuals unable to complete this task in the standard time limit. Our group previously proposed the TMT-B Efficiency Score (TMT-Be), which captures performance variability among examinees who fail to complete the task. The present study assesses the TMT-Be in a longitudinal clinical sample. METHOD: Data were collected via record review of veterans who underwent two clinical neuropsychological evaluations. We identified 30 veterans (mean age Visit 1:69 ± 8.7 years) who were unable to complete TMT-B during at least one evaluation (mean days between visits = 615). Two scoring systems were utilized to examine performance variability: TMT-Be and TMT-B Prorated Score (TMT-Bpr). RESULTS: TMT-Be distribution was less skewed, but more platykuric, compared to TMT-Bpr. TMT-Be and TMT-Bpr were highly correlated. Both metrics correlated with psychomotor speed and another executive task, but not confrontation naming, providing both convergent and discriminant evidence of validity. TMT-Be, but not TMT-Bpr, detected significant decline in performance longitudinally. Age and education were significant predictors of the TMT-Be, but not TMT-Bpr, difference scores. CONCLUSIONS: Both metrics captured performance variability in a clinical sample and provided sufficient variance for examining floor-level performance on the TMT-B. TMT-Be appeared to be less prone to creating outliers and more likely to detect change. The results support the utility of the TMT-Be metric in research and clinical settings.

Neuropsychological assessment without upper limb involvement: a systematic review of oral versions of the Trail Making Test and Symbol-Digit Modalities Test.

The Trail Making Test (TMT) and written version of the Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) assess attention, processing speed, and executive functions but their utility is limited in populations with upper limb dysfunction. Oral versions of the TMT and SDMT exist, but a systematic review of their psychometric properties and clinical utility has not been conducted, which was the goal of this study. Searches were conducted in PubMed and PsycINFO, test manuals, and the reference lists of included articles. Four measures were identified: the SDMT-oral, oral TMT-A, oral TMT-B, and the Mental Alternation Test (MAT). Two investigators independently reviewed abstracts to identify peer-reviewed articles that reported on these measures in adult populations. From each article, one investigator extracted information on reliability, validity, responsiveness, minimum detectable change, normative data, and demographic influences. A second investigator verified the accuracy of the data in a random selection of 10% of papers. The quality of the evidence for each psychometric property was rated on a 4-point scale (unknown, poor, adequate, excellent). Results showed excellent evidence for the SDMT-oral, adequate evidence for the oral TMT-B and MAT, and adequate to poor evidence for the oral TMT-A. These findings inform the clinical assessment of attention, processing speed, and executive functions in individuals with upper limb disability.

Lowering the Floor on Trail Making Test Part B: Psychometric Evidence for a New Scoring Metric.

The Trail Making Test Part B (TMT-B) is widely used in clinical and research settings as a measure of executive function. Standard administration allows a maximal time score (i.e., floor score) of 300 s. This practice potentially masks performance variability among cognitively impaired individuals who cannot complete the task. For example, performances that are nearly complete receive the same 300-s score as a performance of only a few moves. Such performance differences may have utility in research and clinical settings. To address this, we propose a new TMT-B efficiency metric designed to capture clinically relevant performance variability below the standard administration floor. Our metric takes into account time, correct moves, and errors of commission and omission. We demonstrate that the metric has concurrent validity, permits statistical analysis of performances that fall below the test floor, and captures clinically relevant performance variability missed by alternative methods.

Executive Functioning in Alcohol Use Studies: A Brief Review of Findings and Challenges in Assessment.

There is a wealth of research about the links between executive functioning (EF) and alcohol use. However, difficulty may arise in interpreting findings because of the variability between studies regarding the specific components of EF measured, as well as the variability of tasks used to examine each EF construct. The current article considers each of these problems within the context of a literature review that focuses on two topics: (1) the efficacy of EF in predicting alcohol use and alcohol-related consequences, and (2) the effect of acute alcohol intoxication on EF task performance. An additional goal was to identify and describe commonly used EF measures with the intention of providing alcohol researchers information on the assessment of different EF domains. Our findings indicate that there is strong evidence supporting a relation between EF difficulties (particularly response inhibition and information updating) and alcohol use, with additional evidence of a significant interaction between EF and implicit associations on alcohol use. In contrast, research supporting a link between set shifting abilities and later alcohol use is scarce. Additionally, this review found evidence of alcohol acutely affecting many EF processes (particularly response inhibition). Overall, there is a need to replicate these findings with commonly used EF tasks (versus developing numerous tasks within individual laboratories) to better advance our understanding of the relation between EF and alcohol use.

The admissibility of behavioral science evidence in the courtroom: the translation of legal to scientific concepts and back.

Starting with the Daubert case, courtroom rules and guides regulating the admissibility of scientific evidence have undergone major revisions over the past 10 to 15 years. We review these changes and current legal rules and guides, in particular their impact on the admission of behavioral sciences evidence and testimony. We examine commonly intended meanings, conceptualizations, and language use relating to science and the admission of evidence within the legal system and their relation to more familiar terms and concepts within the behavioral sciences, identifying points of continuity and discontinuity. We then review illustrative legal cases involving challenges to the admission of psychological and psychiatric evidence and their implications for mental health professionals. Finally, we offer a framework for conceptualizing and prioritizing key legal criteria for determining admissibility and appraising standing on these factors within the mental health field. Increased mutual understanding between psychology and law should further enhance productive interfaces between the disciplines and add to the many instances in which the proper use of science in the courtroom has facilitated fair resolution of legal conflicts.