Sensitivity and Specificity of Various Digit Span Scores in the Detection of Suspect Effort

Abstract Objective The purpose of the present study was to compare Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-IV (WAIS-IV) Reliable Digit Span (RDS) and Digit Span Age-Corrected Scaled Score (DS-ACSS) sensitivity and specificity, when the effort criterion was determined by between one and five performance validity test (PVT) cut scores. Method Data were collected from 82 adults (18–49) referred for clinical questions of multiple sclerosis, mild traumatic brain injury, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Patients were administered full neuropsychological batteries,with different combinations of PVTs (including Advanced Clinical Solutions Word Choice, Animals raw score, Trails A T-score, Wisconsin Card Sorting Test [WCST; Suhr & Boyer] equation, and California Verbal Learning Test-II Forced Choice). Chi-square and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were utilized. Results Using established RDS (≤7) and DS-ACSS (≤6) cut scores, specificity was highest (90&37; and 86%, respectively), with equivalent sensitivity (90%), when effort was determined by WCST (Suhr & Boyer) equation failure alone. Related area under the curve for RDS was .90 (CI = .76–1.0) and for DS-ACSS was .88 (CI = .74–1.0). Conclusions In this clinical sample, the highest sensitivity and specificity were observed when the RDS cut score was utilized, and effort was based on the WCST criterion. However, the DS-ACSS cut score resulted in strong sensitivity/specificity combinations across more effort classification groups.

Download Full-text

Sensitivity and specificity of neuropsychological tests for dementia and mild cognitive impairment in a sample of residential elderly in South Africa

South African Journal of Psychiatry ◽

10.4102/sajpsychiatry.v20i4.558 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 20 (4) ◽

pp. 7 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Suvira Ramlall ◽

Jennifer Chipps ◽

Ahmed I Bhigjee ◽

Basil J Pillay

Keyword(s):

South Africa ◽

Cognitive Impairment ◽

Mild Cognitive Impairment ◽

Sensitivity And Specificity ◽

Neuropsychological Tests ◽

Word Association ◽

Digit Span ◽

The Elderly ◽

Elderly Persons ◽

Healthy Elderly

Background. Neuropsychological tests can successfully distinguish between healthy elderly persons and those with clinically significant cognitive impairment. Objectives. A battery of neuropsychological tests was evaluated for their discrimination validity of cognitive impairment in a group of elderly persons in Durban, South Africa. Method. A sample of 117 English-speaking participants of different race groups (9 with dementia, 30 with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and 78 controls) from a group of residential homes for the elderly was administered a battery of 11 neuropsychological tests. Kruskal-Wallis independent sample tests were used to compare performance of tests in the groups. Sensitivity and specificity of the tests for dementia and MCI were determined using random operating curve (ROC) analysis. Results. Most tests were able to discriminate between participants with dementia or MCI, and controls (p<0.05). Area under the curve (AUC) values for dementia v. non-dementia participants ranged from 0.519 for the digit span (forward) to 0.828 for the digit symbol (90 s), with 14 of the 29 test scores achieving significance (p<0.05). AUC values for MCI participants ranged from 0.754 for controlled oral word association test (COWAT) Animal to 0.507 for the Rey complex figure test copy, with 17 of the 29 scores achieving significance (p<0.05). Conclusions. Several measures from the neuropsychological battery had discrimination validity for the differential diagnosis of cognitive disturbances in the elderly. Further studies are needed to assess the effect of culture and language on the appropriateness of the tests for different populations.

Download Full-text

Sensitivity and specificity of the Rey Dot Counting Test in patients with suspect effort and various clinical samples

Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology ◽

10.1016/s0887-6177(01)00166-4 ◽

2002 ◽

Vol 17 (7) ◽

pp. 625-642 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

K Boone

Keyword(s):

Sensitivity And Specificity ◽

Clinical Samples ◽

Suspect Effort

Download Full-text

Sensitivity and Specificity of Reliable Digit Span in Malingered Pain-Related Disability

Assessment ◽

10.1177/1073191105274859 ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 12 (2) ◽

pp. 130-136 ◽

Cited By ~ 31

Author(s):

Joseph L. Etherton ◽

Kevin J. Bianchini ◽

Kevin W. Greve ◽

Matthew T. Heinly

Keyword(s):

Sensitivity And Specificity ◽

Digit Span

Download Full-text

Applying Item Response Theory Modeling to Identify Social (Pragmatic) Communication Disorder

Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research ◽

10.1044/2020_jslhr-19-00284 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 63 (6) ◽

pp. 1916-1932 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Haiying Yuan ◽

Christine Dollaghan

Keyword(s):

Item Response Theory ◽

Item Response ◽

Sensitivity And Specificity ◽

Social Communication ◽

National Database ◽

Communication Disorder ◽

Social Communication Questionnaire ◽

Autism Research ◽

The Social ◽

Pragmatic Communication

Purpose No diagnostic tools exist for identifying social (pragmatic) communication disorder (SPCD), a new Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition category for individuals with social communication deficits but not the repetitive, restricted behaviors and interests (RRBIs) that would qualify them for a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). We explored the value of items from a widely used screening measure of ASD for distinguishing SPCD from typical controls (TC; Aim 1) and from ASD (Aim 2). Method We applied item response theory (IRT) modeling to Social Communication Questionnaire–Lifetime ( Rutter, Bailey, & Lord, 2003 ) records available in the National Database for Autism Research. We defined records from putative SPCD ( n = 54), ASD ( n = 278), and TC ( n = 274) groups retrospectively, based on National Database for Autism Research classifications and Autism Diagnostic Interview–Revised responses. After assessing model assumptions, estimating model parameters, and measuring model fit, we identified items in the social communication and RRBI domains that were maximally informative in differentiating the groups. Results IRT modeling identified a set of seven social communication items that distinguished SPCD from TC with sensitivity and specificity > 80%. A set of five RRBI items was less successful in distinguishing SPCD from ASD (sensitivity and specificity < 70%). Conclusion The IRT modeling approach and the Social Communication Questionnaire–Lifetime item sets it identified may be useful in efforts to construct screening and diagnostic measures for SPCD.

Download Full-text