B - 131 Validation of the California Verbal Learning Test-II-Short Form Forced Choice Paradigm as an Indicator of Performance Validity

Abstract Objective Although the Forced Choice (FC) paradigm of the standard California Verbal Learning Test-Second Edition (CVLT-II) has been extensively validated as an embedded performance validity test (PVT), no studies have validated the CVLT-II Short Form (SF) against a standard battery of exte...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Archives of clinical neuropsychology 2024-10, Vol.39 (7), p.1234-1234
Hauptverfasser: Do, Cardinal, Milam, Alicia L, Soble, Jason R, Webber, Troy A
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1234
container_issue 7
container_start_page 1234
container_title Archives of clinical neuropsychology
container_volume 39
creator Do, Cardinal
Milam, Alicia L
Soble, Jason R
Webber, Troy A
description Abstract Objective Although the Forced Choice (FC) paradigm of the standard California Verbal Learning Test-Second Edition (CVLT-II) has been extensively validated as an embedded performance validity test (PVT), no studies have validated the CVLT-II Short Form (SF) against a standard battery of external PVTs. Method Participants included 98 veterans (Mage = 69.7 ± 9.0; 86.7% cisgender-male) who completed the CVLT-II-SF FC and the following independent criterion freestanding/embedded PVTS as part of comprehensive outpatient neuropsychological evaluations: the Advanced Clinical Solutions Word Choice Test, Test of Memory Malingering-Trial 1, and Reliable Digit Span from the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Test-Fourth Edition Digit Span subtest. Invalid performance was identified using two different criteria: (1) failing ≥2 PVTs in addition to other clinical indicators of poor engagement, or (2) failing one PVT. Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) curves tested the classification accuracy of identifying participants in the invalid group versus those with valid presentations and with or without cognitive impairment. Results Using both criteria, ROC analyses accurately identified invalidity (AUCs = 0.708–0.807) in the total sample, with cut-scores of ≤7 or ≤ 8 on the CVLT-II-SF FC exhibiting adequate specificities (0.900–0.986) and sensitivities of 0.407–0.500. Classification accuracy was acceptable for differentiating the invalid and cognitively intact groups (AUCs = 0.734–0.829) at a cut score of ≤8 (specificities = 0.923–0.958, sensitivities = 0.500–0.704), but was variably acceptable for differentiating the invalid and cognitively impaired groups (AUCs = 0.684–0.794; cut-score of ≤7 with specificities = 0.962–0.978 and sensitivities = 0.229–0.407). Conclusions Our findings support the CVLT-II-SF FC trial as an embedded PVT, particularly when differentiating cognitively intact examinees from those with noncredible presentations.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/arclin/acae067.292
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>oup_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1093_arclin_acae067_292</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/arclin/acae067.292</oup_id><sourcerecordid>10.1093/arclin/acae067.292</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c812-9f7c0a9ff333d8162342af4b1f38e4b9e01f189599e1b3275619311db1605d273</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkE1OwzAQhS0EEqVwAVa-gFuPnT8vIaIQqRKViLqNJo7dGiVx5YRFL8C5SWkXLNnMn957I32EPAJfAFdyiUG3rl-iRsOTdCGUuCIzyFLJ4iyS13_mW3I3DJ-c8xhAzMj3M2UUJNAttq7B0fmeekvHvaH5dLE-9A7p1oQaW7o2OK39jpZmGFlRsI-9DyNd-dCdijYNzffeaUM3GLBxu47iQLGnRd84jaMPp-yNCVNsh_2k-_3qxuM9ubHYDubh0uekXL2U-Rtbv78W-dOa6QwEUzbVHJW1Usomg0TISKCNarAyM1GtDAcLmYqVMlBLkcYJKAnQ1JDwuBGpnBNxjtXBD0MwtjoE12E4VsCrE8jqDLK6gKwmkJOJnU3-6_Af_Q9GnHd5</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>B - 131 Validation of the California Verbal Learning Test-II-Short Form Forced Choice Paradigm as an Indicator of Performance Validity</title><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><creator>Do, Cardinal ; Milam, Alicia L ; Soble, Jason R ; Webber, Troy A</creator><creatorcontrib>Do, Cardinal ; Milam, Alicia L ; Soble, Jason R ; Webber, Troy A</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Objective Although the Forced Choice (FC) paradigm of the standard California Verbal Learning Test-Second Edition (CVLT-II) has been extensively validated as an embedded performance validity test (PVT), no studies have validated the CVLT-II Short Form (SF) against a standard battery of external PVTs. Method Participants included 98 veterans (Mage = 69.7 ± 9.0; 86.7% cisgender-male) who completed the CVLT-II-SF FC and the following independent criterion freestanding/embedded PVTS as part of comprehensive outpatient neuropsychological evaluations: the Advanced Clinical Solutions Word Choice Test, Test of Memory Malingering-Trial 1, and Reliable Digit Span from the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Test-Fourth Edition Digit Span subtest. Invalid performance was identified using two different criteria: (1) failing ≥2 PVTs in addition to other clinical indicators of poor engagement, or (2) failing one PVT. Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) curves tested the classification accuracy of identifying participants in the invalid group versus those with valid presentations and with or without cognitive impairment. Results Using both criteria, ROC analyses accurately identified invalidity (AUCs = 0.708–0.807) in the total sample, with cut-scores of ≤7 or ≤ 8 on the CVLT-II-SF FC exhibiting adequate specificities (0.900–0.986) and sensitivities of 0.407–0.500. Classification accuracy was acceptable for differentiating the invalid and cognitively intact groups (AUCs = 0.734–0.829) at a cut score of ≤8 (specificities = 0.923–0.958, sensitivities = 0.500–0.704), but was variably acceptable for differentiating the invalid and cognitively impaired groups (AUCs = 0.684–0.794; cut-score of ≤7 with specificities = 0.962–0.978 and sensitivities = 0.229–0.407). Conclusions Our findings support the CVLT-II-SF FC trial as an embedded PVT, particularly when differentiating cognitively intact examinees from those with noncredible presentations.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1873-5843</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-5843</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/arclin/acae067.292</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford University Press</publisher><ispartof>Archives of clinical neuropsychology, 2024-10, Vol.39 (7), p.1234-1234</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com. 2024</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Do, Cardinal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Milam, Alicia L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soble, Jason R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Webber, Troy A</creatorcontrib><title>B - 131 Validation of the California Verbal Learning Test-II-Short Form Forced Choice Paradigm as an Indicator of Performance Validity</title><title>Archives of clinical neuropsychology</title><description>Abstract Objective Although the Forced Choice (FC) paradigm of the standard California Verbal Learning Test-Second Edition (CVLT-II) has been extensively validated as an embedded performance validity test (PVT), no studies have validated the CVLT-II Short Form (SF) against a standard battery of external PVTs. Method Participants included 98 veterans (Mage = 69.7 ± 9.0; 86.7% cisgender-male) who completed the CVLT-II-SF FC and the following independent criterion freestanding/embedded PVTS as part of comprehensive outpatient neuropsychological evaluations: the Advanced Clinical Solutions Word Choice Test, Test of Memory Malingering-Trial 1, and Reliable Digit Span from the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Test-Fourth Edition Digit Span subtest. Invalid performance was identified using two different criteria: (1) failing ≥2 PVTs in addition to other clinical indicators of poor engagement, or (2) failing one PVT. Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) curves tested the classification accuracy of identifying participants in the invalid group versus those with valid presentations and with or without cognitive impairment. Results Using both criteria, ROC analyses accurately identified invalidity (AUCs = 0.708–0.807) in the total sample, with cut-scores of ≤7 or ≤ 8 on the CVLT-II-SF FC exhibiting adequate specificities (0.900–0.986) and sensitivities of 0.407–0.500. Classification accuracy was acceptable for differentiating the invalid and cognitively intact groups (AUCs = 0.734–0.829) at a cut score of ≤8 (specificities = 0.923–0.958, sensitivities = 0.500–0.704), but was variably acceptable for differentiating the invalid and cognitively impaired groups (AUCs = 0.684–0.794; cut-score of ≤7 with specificities = 0.962–0.978 and sensitivities = 0.229–0.407). Conclusions Our findings support the CVLT-II-SF FC trial as an embedded PVT, particularly when differentiating cognitively intact examinees from those with noncredible presentations.</description><issn>1873-5843</issn><issn>1873-5843</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkE1OwzAQhS0EEqVwAVa-gFuPnT8vIaIQqRKViLqNJo7dGiVx5YRFL8C5SWkXLNnMn957I32EPAJfAFdyiUG3rl-iRsOTdCGUuCIzyFLJ4iyS13_mW3I3DJ-c8xhAzMj3M2UUJNAttq7B0fmeekvHvaH5dLE-9A7p1oQaW7o2OK39jpZmGFlRsI-9DyNd-dCdijYNzffeaUM3GLBxu47iQLGnRd84jaMPp-yNCVNsh_2k-_3qxuM9ubHYDubh0uekXL2U-Rtbv78W-dOa6QwEUzbVHJW1Usomg0TISKCNarAyM1GtDAcLmYqVMlBLkcYJKAnQ1JDwuBGpnBNxjtXBD0MwtjoE12E4VsCrE8jqDLK6gKwmkJOJnU3-6_Af_Q9GnHd5</recordid><startdate>20241025</startdate><enddate>20241025</enddate><creator>Do, Cardinal</creator><creator>Milam, Alicia L</creator><creator>Soble, Jason R</creator><creator>Webber, Troy A</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20241025</creationdate><title>B - 131 Validation of the California Verbal Learning Test-II-Short Form Forced Choice Paradigm as an Indicator of Performance Validity</title><author>Do, Cardinal ; Milam, Alicia L ; Soble, Jason R ; Webber, Troy A</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c812-9f7c0a9ff333d8162342af4b1f38e4b9e01f189599e1b3275619311db1605d273</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Do, Cardinal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Milam, Alicia L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soble, Jason R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Webber, Troy A</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Archives of clinical neuropsychology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Do, Cardinal</au><au>Milam, Alicia L</au><au>Soble, Jason R</au><au>Webber, Troy A</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>B - 131 Validation of the California Verbal Learning Test-II-Short Form Forced Choice Paradigm as an Indicator of Performance Validity</atitle><jtitle>Archives of clinical neuropsychology</jtitle><date>2024-10-25</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>39</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>1234</spage><epage>1234</epage><pages>1234-1234</pages><issn>1873-5843</issn><eissn>1873-5843</eissn><abstract>Abstract Objective Although the Forced Choice (FC) paradigm of the standard California Verbal Learning Test-Second Edition (CVLT-II) has been extensively validated as an embedded performance validity test (PVT), no studies have validated the CVLT-II Short Form (SF) against a standard battery of external PVTs. Method Participants included 98 veterans (Mage = 69.7 ± 9.0; 86.7% cisgender-male) who completed the CVLT-II-SF FC and the following independent criterion freestanding/embedded PVTS as part of comprehensive outpatient neuropsychological evaluations: the Advanced Clinical Solutions Word Choice Test, Test of Memory Malingering-Trial 1, and Reliable Digit Span from the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Test-Fourth Edition Digit Span subtest. Invalid performance was identified using two different criteria: (1) failing ≥2 PVTs in addition to other clinical indicators of poor engagement, or (2) failing one PVT. Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) curves tested the classification accuracy of identifying participants in the invalid group versus those with valid presentations and with or without cognitive impairment. Results Using both criteria, ROC analyses accurately identified invalidity (AUCs = 0.708–0.807) in the total sample, with cut-scores of ≤7 or ≤ 8 on the CVLT-II-SF FC exhibiting adequate specificities (0.900–0.986) and sensitivities of 0.407–0.500. Classification accuracy was acceptable for differentiating the invalid and cognitively intact groups (AUCs = 0.734–0.829) at a cut score of ≤8 (specificities = 0.923–0.958, sensitivities = 0.500–0.704), but was variably acceptable for differentiating the invalid and cognitively impaired groups (AUCs = 0.684–0.794; cut-score of ≤7 with specificities = 0.962–0.978 and sensitivities = 0.229–0.407). Conclusions Our findings support the CVLT-II-SF FC trial as an embedded PVT, particularly when differentiating cognitively intact examinees from those with noncredible presentations.</abstract><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><doi>10.1093/arclin/acae067.292</doi><tpages>1</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1873-5843
ispartof Archives of clinical neuropsychology, 2024-10, Vol.39 (7), p.1234-1234
issn 1873-5843
1873-5843
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1093_arclin_acae067_292
source Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)
title B - 131 Validation of the California Verbal Learning Test-II-Short Form Forced Choice Paradigm as an Indicator of Performance Validity
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T22%3A54%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-oup_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=B%20-%20131%20Validation%20of%20the%20California%20Verbal%20Learning%20Test-II-Short%20Form%20Forced%20Choice%20Paradigm%20as%20an%20Indicator%20of%20Performance%20Validity&rft.jtitle=Archives%20of%20clinical%20neuropsychology&rft.au=Do,%20Cardinal&rft.date=2024-10-25&rft.volume=39&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=1234&rft.epage=1234&rft.pages=1234-1234&rft.issn=1873-5843&rft.eissn=1873-5843&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/arclin/acae067.292&rft_dat=%3Coup_cross%3E10.1093/arclin/acae067.292%3C/oup_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_oup_id=10.1093/arclin/acae067.292&rfr_iscdi=true