RyAnna Zenisek1, Scott R Millis2, Sarah J Banks3, Justin B Miller4. 1. Department of Psychology, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV, USA. 2. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI, USA. 3. Cleveland Clinic Lou Ruvo Center for Brain Health, Las Vegas, NV, USA. 4. Cleveland Clinic Lou Ruvo Center for Brain Health, Las Vegas, NV, USA millerj4@ccf.org.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The Reliable Digit Span (RDS) is a well-validated embedded indicator of performance validity. An RDS score of ≤7 is commonly referenced as indicative of invalid performance; however, few studies have examined the classification accuracy of the RDS among individuals suspected for dementia. The current study evaluated performance of the RDS in a clinical sample of 934 non-litigating individuals presenting to an outpatient memory disorders clinic for assessment of dementia. METHOD: The RDS was calculated for each participant in the context of a comprehensive neuropsychological assessment completed as part of routine clinical care. Score distributions were examined to establish the base rate of below criterion performance for RDS cutoffs of ≤7, ≤6, and ≤5. One-way ANOVA was used to compare performance on a cognitive screening measure and informant reports of functional independence of those falling below and above cutoffs. RESULTS: A cutoff score of ≤7 resulted in a high prevalence of below-criterion performance (29.7%), though an RDS of ≤6 was associated with fewer below-criterion scores (12.8%) and prevalence of an RDS of ≤5 was infrequent (4.3%). Those scoring below cutoffs performed worse on cognitive measures compared with those falling above cutoffs. CONCLUSIONS: Using the RDS as a measure of performance validity among individuals presenting with a possibility of dementia increases the risk of misinterpreting genuine cognitive impairment as invalid performance when higher cutoffs are used; lower cutoffs may be useful when interpreted in conjunction with other measures of performance validity.
OBJECTIVE: The Reliable Digit Span (RDS) is a well-validated embedded indicator of performance validity. An RDS score of ≤7 is commonly referenced as indicative of invalid performance; however, few studies have examined the classification accuracy of the RDS among individuals suspected for dementia. The current study evaluated performance of the RDS in a clinical sample of 934 non-litigating individuals presenting to an outpatientmemory disorders clinic for assessment of dementia. METHOD: The RDS was calculated for each participant in the context of a comprehensive neuropsychological assessment completed as part of routine clinical care. Score distributions were examined to establish the base rate of below criterion performance for RDS cutoffs of ≤7, ≤6, and ≤5. One-way ANOVA was used to compare performance on a cognitive screening measure and informant reports of functional independence of those falling below and above cutoffs. RESULTS: A cutoff score of ≤7 resulted in a high prevalence of below-criterion performance (29.7%), though an RDS of ≤6 was associated with fewer below-criterion scores (12.8%) and prevalence of an RDS of ≤5 was infrequent (4.3%). Those scoring below cutoffs performed worse on cognitive measures compared with those falling above cutoffs. CONCLUSIONS: Using the RDS as a measure of performance validity among individuals presenting with a possibility of dementia increases the risk of misinterpreting genuine cognitive impairment as invalid performance when higher cutoffs are used; lower cutoffs may be useful when interpreted in conjunction with other measures of performance validity.
Authors: Laura L S Howe; Ashton M Anderson; David A S Kaufman; Bonnie C Sachs; David W Loring Journal: Arch Clin Neuropsychol Date: 2007-07-24 Impact factor: 2.813
Authors: Angela Sekely; Derek S Tsang; Donald Mabbott; Paul Kongkham; Gelareh Zadeh; Konstantine K Zakzanis; Kim Edelstein Journal: Neurooncol Pract Date: 2022-02-19
Authors: Dora Kanellopoulos; Victoria Wilkins; Jimmy Avari; Lauren Oberlin; Lindsay Arader; Merete Chaplin; Samprit Banerjee; George S Alexopoulos Journal: Am J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2020-01-25 Impact factor: 4.105
Authors: Angela Sekely; Konstantine K Zakzanis; Donald Mabbott; Derek S Tsang; Paul Kongkham; Gelareh Zadeh; Kim Edelstein Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2022-01-18 Impact factor: 3.359