Reassessing rumination: Validity of the Day Reconstruction Method for Rumination (DRM-R) to assess episodes of rumination in daily life.

Rumination is a robust vulnerability to depression and potential treatment target. However, we know relatively little about rumination in daily life. This study tested the validity of a new approach for assessing daily episodes of rumination, the Day Reconstruction Method for Rumination (DRM-R). Participants (N = 127) who were either high or low in neuroticism completed baseline self-report measures (e.g., depression, trait rumination). Next, they completed the DRM-R by reconstructing the previous day into a series of "scenes," identifying discrete episodes of rumination, and responding to follow-up items about each episode. 78.6% of high neuroticism participants reported experiencing discrete periods of rumination, 80.0% reported constant ruminative thoughts in the back of their heads, and 68.6% reported ruminative thoughts of fluctuating intensity. Time spent ruminating was moderately correlated with trait measures of rumination and worry. Findings provide preliminary evidence that the DRM-R is a valid method for assessing discrete episodes of rumination in daily life. The DRM-R may reveal, ideographically, the relationship between specific thought content and features of ruminative episodes (e.g., length, frequency). Further research is needed to establish whether the DRM-R can detect changes in rumination across multiple days and how it corresponds with traditional daily diary methods and ecological momentary assessment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Necessity of technicians for computerized neuropsychological assessment devices in multiple sclerosis.

OBJECTIVE: Determine the influence of technician supervision on computer-administered cognitive tests in multiple sclerosis (MS). METHODS: Eighty MS patients underwent assessment using the CogState Brief Battery (CSBB) and the Cleveland Clinic Cognitive Battery (C3B). Each was administered twice, once with a technician guiding assessment, and once with technician-absent. Twenty-eight healthy controls were also evaluated. RESULTS: The influence of technician guidance was not statistically significant for group means on either test. For CSBB, administration problems were more common in the technician-absent condition. CONCLUSION: In this MS sample, reliable and valid test results were obtained from computer-assisted cognitive testing without technician guidance.

Computerized neuropsychological assessment devices in multiple sclerosis: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The proliferation of computerized neuropsychological assessment devices (CNADs) for screening and monitoring cognitive impairment is increasing exponentially. Previous reviews of computerized tests for multiple sclerosis (MS) were primarily qualitative and did not rigorously compare CNADs on psychometric properties. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to systematically review the literature on the use of CNADs in MS and identify test batteries and single tests with good evidence for reliability and validity. METHOD: A search of four major online databases was conducted for publications related to computerized testing and MS. Test-retest reliability and validity coefficients and effect sizes were recorded for each CNAD test, along with administration characteristics. RESULTS: We identified 11 batteries and 33 individual tests from 120 peer-reviewed articles meeting the inclusion criteria. CNADs with the strongest psychometric support include the CogState Brief Battery, Cognitive Drug Research Battery, NeuroTrax, CNS-Vital Signs, and computer-based administrations of the Symbol Digit Modalities Test. CONCLUSION: We identified several CNADs that are valid to screen for MS-related cognitive impairment, or to supplement full, conventional neuropsychological assessment. The necessity of testing with a technician, and in a controlled clinic/laboratory environment, remains uncertain.