Official Position of the American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology Social Security Administration Policy on Validity Testing: Guidance and Recommendations for Change.

UNLABELLED: The milestone publication by Slick, Sherman, and Iverson (1999) of criteria for determining malingered neurocognitive dysfunction led to extensive research on validity testing. Position statements by the National Academy of Neuropsychology and the American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology (AACN) recommended routine validity testing in neuropsychological evaluations. Despite this widespread scientific and professional support, the Social Security Administration (SSA) continued to discourage validity testing, a stance that led to a congressional initiative for SSA to reevaluate their position. In response, SSA commissioned the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to evaluate the science concerning the validation of psychological testing. The IOM concluded that validity assessment was necessary in psychological and neuropsychological examinations (IOM, 2015 ). OBJECTIVE: The AACN sought to provide independent expert guidance and recommendations concerning the use of validity testing in disability determinations. METHOD: A panel of contributors to the science of validity testing and its application to the disability process was charged with describing why the disability process for SSA needs improvement, and indicating the necessity for validity testing in disability exams. RESULTS: This work showed how the determination of malingering is a probability proposition, described how different types of validity tests are appropriate, provided evidence concerning non-credible findings in children and low-functioning individuals, and discussed the appropriate evaluation of pain disorders typically seen outside of mental consultations. CONCLUSIONS: A scientific plan for validity assessment that additionally protects test security is needed in disability determinations and in research on classification accuracy of disability decisions.

Sources of poor performance on the Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test among children with learning difficulties: a dynamic assessment approach.

A dynamic assessment approach was used to examine the source of poor performance on the Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test (ROCF) among 202 school-age children referred for learning difficulties. The ROCF was administered in the standard format and then in a structured format that highlighted the design's organizational framework. Manipulating encoding in this way improved recall to at least age-level for the majority of children. Those children who did not benefit from the structured format had relatively poor visual organizational skills. For most children with learning problems, poor ROCF performance stems from metacognitive difficulties; for a minority, the source appears to be more perceptual. A dynamic assessment procedure can enhance the diagnostic utility of the ROCF for children.

Screening for Trichomonas vaginalis infection by use of acridine orange fluorescent microscopy.

The acridine orange test for detection of Trichomonas vaginalis in smears has been adapted for delayed examination of specimens. Mailed-in slides stained by acridine orange were compared with on-site wet mounts; the acridine orange test detected 96% of all positives, whereas only 76% were detected by wet mounts. In a similar comparison with Papanicolaou smears, the acridine orange test detected 89% as compared with 67% detected by Papanicolaou smears.