Loading…
Providing a brief corrective statement does not improve test performance in patients invalidating testing: A multisite, single-blind randomized controlled trial
Objective: Performance below the actual abilities of the examinee can be measured using performance validity tests (PVTs). PVT failure negatively impacts the quality of the neuropsychological assessment. In our study, we addressed this issue by providing a brief corrective statement regarding invali...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Clinical neuropsychologist 2024-07, p.1-23 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Citations: | Items that this one cites |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| cited_by | |
|---|---|
| cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c211t-4152d98856f51da70a3628157270e4d1eb1b1edfbbefb13ec26a7e166b2d2c373 |
| container_end_page | 23 |
| container_issue | |
| container_start_page | 1 |
| container_title | Clinical neuropsychologist |
| container_volume | |
| creator | Roor, Jeroen J. Dandachi-FitzGerald, Brechje Peters, Maarten J. V. Ponds, Rudolf W.H.M. |
| description | Objective: Performance below the actual abilities of the examinee can be measured using performance validity tests (PVTs). PVT failure negatively impacts the quality of the neuropsychological assessment. In our study, we addressed this issue by providing a brief corrective statement regarding invalidity to improve test-taking behavior. Methods: This study is a multisite single-blind randomized controlled trial in a consecutive sample of clinically referred adult patients (N = 196) in a general hospital setting. Patients who failed a PVT (n = 71) were randomly allocated to a corrective statement approach (CS; n = 39), in which a brief verbal corrective statement was given by the technician, or received no corrective statement upon indications of invalid performance (NO-CS; n = 32). Both groups (CS and NO-CS) were provided with the same subsequently repeated and newly administered tests. Results: There were no group (CS vs. NO-CS) differences on both the repeated and single-administered PVTs and standard cognitive tests. Furthermore, invalid performing participants benefited significantly less from the repeated test administration compared to the valid performing group. Conclusions: Our study found that a brief corrective within-session statement, to address PVT failure and improve test-taking behavior, did not improve consequent test performance. These results suggest limited value of a brief verbal corrective statement to influence performance below best of capabilities. It highlights the need for more research to identify more effective approaches that can enhance patients test-taking behavior. Ultimately, such efforts are critical in ensuring accurate diagnosis and effective treatment recommendations for patients.Objective: Performance below the actual abilities of the examinee can be measured using performance validity tests (PVTs). PVT failure negatively impacts the quality of the neuropsychological assessment. In our study, we addressed this issue by providing a brief corrective statement regarding invalidity to improve test-taking behavior. Methods: This study is a multisite single-blind randomized controlled trial in a consecutive sample of clinically referred adult patients (N = 196) in a general hospital setting. Patients who failed a PVT (n = 71) were randomly allocated to a corrective statement approach (CS; n = 39), in which a brief verbal corrective statement was given by the technician, or received no corrective statement upon indications of |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1080/13854046.2024.2382340 |
| format | article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3084776555</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3084776555</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c211t-4152d98856f51da70a3628157270e4d1eb1b1edfbbefb13ec26a7e166b2d2c373</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo1kctKAzEUhgdRsFYfQcjShVNznYzuSvEGBV3oOmQmZySSSWqSFvRpfFQztK7Ofw7fufFX1SXBC4JbfENYKzjmzYJiyheUtZRxfFTNiOS85oTz46ILU0_QaXWW0ifGpOFUzqrf1xh21lj_gTTqooUB9SFG6LPdAUpZZxjBZ2QCJORDRnbclA5AGVJGG4hDiKP2PSDr0UZnW-BU9E47a0pa5k5kiXdoicatyzbZDNcolZKDunPWGxS1N2G0P2DKdp9jcK7IHK1259XJoF2Ci0OcV-8P92-rp3r98vi8Wq7rnhKSy5uCmtu2Fc0giNESa9bQlghJJQZuCHSkI2CGroOhIwx62mgJpGk6amjPJJtXV_u55b2vbTlZjTb14Jz2ELZJMdxyKRshREHFHu1jSCnCoDbRjjp-K4LV5Ij6d0RNjqiDI-wPsWGC5w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3084776555</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Providing a brief corrective statement does not improve test performance in patients invalidating testing: A multisite, single-blind randomized controlled trial</title><source>Taylor and Francis Social Sciences and Humanities Collection</source><creator>Roor, Jeroen J. ; Dandachi-FitzGerald, Brechje ; Peters, Maarten J. V. ; Ponds, Rudolf W.H.M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Roor, Jeroen J. ; Dandachi-FitzGerald, Brechje ; Peters, Maarten J. V. ; Ponds, Rudolf W.H.M.</creatorcontrib><description>Objective: Performance below the actual abilities of the examinee can be measured using performance validity tests (PVTs). PVT failure negatively impacts the quality of the neuropsychological assessment. In our study, we addressed this issue by providing a brief corrective statement regarding invalidity to improve test-taking behavior. Methods: This study is a multisite single-blind randomized controlled trial in a consecutive sample of clinically referred adult patients (N = 196) in a general hospital setting. Patients who failed a PVT (n = 71) were randomly allocated to a corrective statement approach (CS; n = 39), in which a brief verbal corrective statement was given by the technician, or received no corrective statement upon indications of invalid performance (NO-CS; n = 32). Both groups (CS and NO-CS) were provided with the same subsequently repeated and newly administered tests. Results: There were no group (CS vs. NO-CS) differences on both the repeated and single-administered PVTs and standard cognitive tests. Furthermore, invalid performing participants benefited significantly less from the repeated test administration compared to the valid performing group. Conclusions: Our study found that a brief corrective within-session statement, to address PVT failure and improve test-taking behavior, did not improve consequent test performance. These results suggest limited value of a brief verbal corrective statement to influence performance below best of capabilities. It highlights the need for more research to identify more effective approaches that can enhance patients test-taking behavior. Ultimately, such efforts are critical in ensuring accurate diagnosis and effective treatment recommendations for patients.Objective: Performance below the actual abilities of the examinee can be measured using performance validity tests (PVTs). PVT failure negatively impacts the quality of the neuropsychological assessment. In our study, we addressed this issue by providing a brief corrective statement regarding invalidity to improve test-taking behavior. Methods: This study is a multisite single-blind randomized controlled trial in a consecutive sample of clinically referred adult patients (N = 196) in a general hospital setting. Patients who failed a PVT (n = 71) were randomly allocated to a corrective statement approach (CS; n = 39), in which a brief verbal corrective statement was given by the technician, or received no corrective statement upon indications of invalid performance (NO-CS; n = 32). Both groups (CS and NO-CS) were provided with the same subsequently repeated and newly administered tests. Results: There were no group (CS vs. NO-CS) differences on both the repeated and single-administered PVTs and standard cognitive tests. Furthermore, invalid performing participants benefited significantly less from the repeated test administration compared to the valid performing group. Conclusions: Our study found that a brief corrective within-session statement, to address PVT failure and improve test-taking behavior, did not improve consequent test performance. These results suggest limited value of a brief verbal corrective statement to influence performance below best of capabilities. It highlights the need for more research to identify more effective approaches that can enhance patients test-taking behavior. Ultimately, such efforts are critical in ensuring accurate diagnosis and effective treatment recommendations for patients.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1385-4046</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1744-4144</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1744-4144</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/13854046.2024.2382340</identifier><language>eng</language><ispartof>Clinical neuropsychologist, 2024-07, p.1-23</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c211t-4152d98856f51da70a3628157270e4d1eb1b1edfbbefb13ec26a7e166b2d2c373</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-9748-4659 ; 0000-0002-8984-8192 ; 0000-0002-3344-1051 ; 0000-0003-3729-229X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>315,786,790,27957,27958</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Roor, Jeroen J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dandachi-FitzGerald, Brechje</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peters, Maarten J. V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ponds, Rudolf W.H.M.</creatorcontrib><title>Providing a brief corrective statement does not improve test performance in patients invalidating testing: A multisite, single-blind randomized controlled trial</title><title>Clinical neuropsychologist</title><description>Objective: Performance below the actual abilities of the examinee can be measured using performance validity tests (PVTs). PVT failure negatively impacts the quality of the neuropsychological assessment. In our study, we addressed this issue by providing a brief corrective statement regarding invalidity to improve test-taking behavior. Methods: This study is a multisite single-blind randomized controlled trial in a consecutive sample of clinically referred adult patients (N = 196) in a general hospital setting. Patients who failed a PVT (n = 71) were randomly allocated to a corrective statement approach (CS; n = 39), in which a brief verbal corrective statement was given by the technician, or received no corrective statement upon indications of invalid performance (NO-CS; n = 32). Both groups (CS and NO-CS) were provided with the same subsequently repeated and newly administered tests. Results: There were no group (CS vs. NO-CS) differences on both the repeated and single-administered PVTs and standard cognitive tests. Furthermore, invalid performing participants benefited significantly less from the repeated test administration compared to the valid performing group. Conclusions: Our study found that a brief corrective within-session statement, to address PVT failure and improve test-taking behavior, did not improve consequent test performance. These results suggest limited value of a brief verbal corrective statement to influence performance below best of capabilities. It highlights the need for more research to identify more effective approaches that can enhance patients test-taking behavior. Ultimately, such efforts are critical in ensuring accurate diagnosis and effective treatment recommendations for patients.Objective: Performance below the actual abilities of the examinee can be measured using performance validity tests (PVTs). PVT failure negatively impacts the quality of the neuropsychological assessment. In our study, we addressed this issue by providing a brief corrective statement regarding invalidity to improve test-taking behavior. Methods: This study is a multisite single-blind randomized controlled trial in a consecutive sample of clinically referred adult patients (N = 196) in a general hospital setting. Patients who failed a PVT (n = 71) were randomly allocated to a corrective statement approach (CS; n = 39), in which a brief verbal corrective statement was given by the technician, or received no corrective statement upon indications of invalid performance (NO-CS; n = 32). Both groups (CS and NO-CS) were provided with the same subsequently repeated and newly administered tests. Results: There were no group (CS vs. NO-CS) differences on both the repeated and single-administered PVTs and standard cognitive tests. Furthermore, invalid performing participants benefited significantly less from the repeated test administration compared to the valid performing group. Conclusions: Our study found that a brief corrective within-session statement, to address PVT failure and improve test-taking behavior, did not improve consequent test performance. These results suggest limited value of a brief verbal corrective statement to influence performance below best of capabilities. It highlights the need for more research to identify more effective approaches that can enhance patients test-taking behavior. Ultimately, such efforts are critical in ensuring accurate diagnosis and effective treatment recommendations for patients.</description><issn>1385-4046</issn><issn>1744-4144</issn><issn>1744-4144</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNo1kctKAzEUhgdRsFYfQcjShVNznYzuSvEGBV3oOmQmZySSSWqSFvRpfFQztK7Ofw7fufFX1SXBC4JbfENYKzjmzYJiyheUtZRxfFTNiOS85oTz46ILU0_QaXWW0ifGpOFUzqrf1xh21lj_gTTqooUB9SFG6LPdAUpZZxjBZ2QCJORDRnbclA5AGVJGG4hDiKP2PSDr0UZnW-BU9E47a0pa5k5kiXdoicatyzbZDNcolZKDunPWGxS1N2G0P2DKdp9jcK7IHK1259XJoF2Ci0OcV-8P92-rp3r98vi8Wq7rnhKSy5uCmtu2Fc0giNESa9bQlghJJQZuCHSkI2CGroOhIwx62mgJpGk6amjPJJtXV_u55b2vbTlZjTb14Jz2ELZJMdxyKRshREHFHu1jSCnCoDbRjjp-K4LV5Ij6d0RNjqiDI-wPsWGC5w</recordid><startdate>20240726</startdate><enddate>20240726</enddate><creator>Roor, Jeroen J.</creator><creator>Dandachi-FitzGerald, Brechje</creator><creator>Peters, Maarten J. V.</creator><creator>Ponds, Rudolf W.H.M.</creator><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9748-4659</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8984-8192</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3344-1051</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3729-229X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20240726</creationdate><title>Providing a brief corrective statement does not improve test performance in patients invalidating testing: A multisite, single-blind randomized controlled trial</title><author>Roor, Jeroen J. ; Dandachi-FitzGerald, Brechje ; Peters, Maarten J. V. ; Ponds, Rudolf W.H.M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c211t-4152d98856f51da70a3628157270e4d1eb1b1edfbbefb13ec26a7e166b2d2c373</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Roor, Jeroen J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dandachi-FitzGerald, Brechje</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peters, Maarten J. V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ponds, Rudolf W.H.M.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Clinical neuropsychologist</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Roor, Jeroen J.</au><au>Dandachi-FitzGerald, Brechje</au><au>Peters, Maarten J. V.</au><au>Ponds, Rudolf W.H.M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Providing a brief corrective statement does not improve test performance in patients invalidating testing: A multisite, single-blind randomized controlled trial</atitle><jtitle>Clinical neuropsychologist</jtitle><date>2024-07-26</date><risdate>2024</risdate><spage>1</spage><epage>23</epage><pages>1-23</pages><issn>1385-4046</issn><issn>1744-4144</issn><eissn>1744-4144</eissn><notes>ObjectType-Article-1</notes><notes>SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1</notes><notes>ObjectType-Feature-2</notes><notes>content type line 23</notes><abstract>Objective: Performance below the actual abilities of the examinee can be measured using performance validity tests (PVTs). PVT failure negatively impacts the quality of the neuropsychological assessment. In our study, we addressed this issue by providing a brief corrective statement regarding invalidity to improve test-taking behavior. Methods: This study is a multisite single-blind randomized controlled trial in a consecutive sample of clinically referred adult patients (N = 196) in a general hospital setting. Patients who failed a PVT (n = 71) were randomly allocated to a corrective statement approach (CS; n = 39), in which a brief verbal corrective statement was given by the technician, or received no corrective statement upon indications of invalid performance (NO-CS; n = 32). Both groups (CS and NO-CS) were provided with the same subsequently repeated and newly administered tests. Results: There were no group (CS vs. NO-CS) differences on both the repeated and single-administered PVTs and standard cognitive tests. Furthermore, invalid performing participants benefited significantly less from the repeated test administration compared to the valid performing group. Conclusions: Our study found that a brief corrective within-session statement, to address PVT failure and improve test-taking behavior, did not improve consequent test performance. These results suggest limited value of a brief verbal corrective statement to influence performance below best of capabilities. It highlights the need for more research to identify more effective approaches that can enhance patients test-taking behavior. Ultimately, such efforts are critical in ensuring accurate diagnosis and effective treatment recommendations for patients.Objective: Performance below the actual abilities of the examinee can be measured using performance validity tests (PVTs). PVT failure negatively impacts the quality of the neuropsychological assessment. In our study, we addressed this issue by providing a brief corrective statement regarding invalidity to improve test-taking behavior. Methods: This study is a multisite single-blind randomized controlled trial in a consecutive sample of clinically referred adult patients (N = 196) in a general hospital setting. Patients who failed a PVT (n = 71) were randomly allocated to a corrective statement approach (CS; n = 39), in which a brief verbal corrective statement was given by the technician, or received no corrective statement upon indications of invalid performance (NO-CS; n = 32). Both groups (CS and NO-CS) were provided with the same subsequently repeated and newly administered tests. Results: There were no group (CS vs. NO-CS) differences on both the repeated and single-administered PVTs and standard cognitive tests. Furthermore, invalid performing participants benefited significantly less from the repeated test administration compared to the valid performing group. Conclusions: Our study found that a brief corrective within-session statement, to address PVT failure and improve test-taking behavior, did not improve consequent test performance. These results suggest limited value of a brief verbal corrective statement to influence performance below best of capabilities. It highlights the need for more research to identify more effective approaches that can enhance patients test-taking behavior. Ultimately, such efforts are critical in ensuring accurate diagnosis and effective treatment recommendations for patients.</abstract><doi>10.1080/13854046.2024.2382340</doi><tpages>23</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9748-4659</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8984-8192</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3344-1051</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3729-229X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1385-4046 |
| ispartof | Clinical neuropsychologist, 2024-07, p.1-23 |
| issn | 1385-4046 1744-4144 1744-4144 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3084776555 |
| source | Taylor and Francis Social Sciences and Humanities Collection |
| title | Providing a brief corrective statement does not improve test performance in patients invalidating testing: A multisite, single-blind randomized controlled trial |
| url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-09-22T10%3A14%3A00IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Providing%20a%20brief%20corrective%20statement%20does%20not%20improve%20test%20performance%20in%20patients%20invalidating%20testing:%20A%20multisite,%20single-blind%20randomized%20controlled%20trial&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20neuropsychologist&rft.au=Roor,%20Jeroen%20J.&rft.date=2024-07-26&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=23&rft.pages=1-23&rft.issn=1385-4046&rft.eissn=1744-4144&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/13854046.2024.2382340&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3084776555%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c211t-4152d98856f51da70a3628157270e4d1eb1b1edfbbefb13ec26a7e166b2d2c373%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3084776555&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |