Trail Making Test: issues in Normative Data Selection

The Trail Making Test (TMT) is one of the most frequently administered neuropsychological instruments, having been used in the evaluation of cognitive dysfunction for over 50 years. Despite the measure's extensive clinical use and proliferation of research, no comprehensive review of the adult...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Applied neuropsychology 1998-06, Vol.5 (2), p.65-73
Hauptverfasser: Soukup, Vicki M., Ingram, Fred, Grady, James J., Schiess, Mya C.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 73
container_issue 2
container_start_page 65
container_title Applied neuropsychology
container_volume 5
creator Soukup, Vicki M.
Ingram, Fred
Grady, James J.
Schiess, Mya C.
description The Trail Making Test (TMT) is one of the most frequently administered neuropsychological instruments, having been used in the evaluation of cognitive dysfunction for over 50 years. Despite the measure's extensive clinical use and proliferation of research, no comprehensive review of the adult TMT normative literature is available. This report examines the available TMT normative reports and provides a summary of the sample characteristics. Significant variability between studies precludes the use of metanorms. Clinically, these findings indicate that biased results may be obtained if the most appropriate normative data set is not used and underscore the importance of identifying the normative comparison group that approximates the relevant patient characteristics. To assist the clinician, selected normative reports (based on certain exclusionary parameters) have been compiled for three nonclinical comparison groups: (a) an adolescent and young adult group (ages 15-24), (b) an adult group (ages 20-54), and (c) an older adult group (ages 55-85). Results are discussed in terms of the influence of moderator variables on TMT performance and other factors, such as procedural differences in administration, that may account for the significant variability between normative samples.
doi_str_mv 10.1207/s15324826an0502_2
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmed_primary_16318456</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>69259956</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c331t-1d45629d6f12370cd5263ab68ab17a6b909159a6833dc9fea6392cb43331b1583</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kMtOwzAQRS0EoqXwAWyQV-wCfsRujNig8pQKLChra-I4yOA4xU5B_XsStRILxGqk0bl3RgehY0rOKCPT80QFZ3nBJAQiCNNsB42HVTbsdtGYKFJkOSvYCB2k9E4IyQkX-2hEJadFLuQYiUUE5_EjfLjwhhc2dRfYpbSyCbuAn9rYQOe-LL6GDvCL9dZ0rg2HaK8Gn-zRdk7Q6-3NYnafzZ_vHmZX88xwTruMVv0NpipZU8anxFSCSQ6lLKCkU5ClIooKBbLgvDKqtiC5YqbMeZ8uqSj4BJ1uepex_ex_6nTjkrHeQ7DtKmmpmFBKyB6kG9DENqVoa72MroG41pTowZX-46rPnGzLV2Vjq9_EVk4PXG4AF-pBxHcbfaU7WPs21hGCcUnz__t_AN4Zdrc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>69259956</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Trail Making Test: issues in Normative Data Selection</title><source>Taylor &amp; Francis Journals Complete</source><creator>Soukup, Vicki M. ; Ingram, Fred ; Grady, James J. ; Schiess, Mya C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Soukup, Vicki M. ; Ingram, Fred ; Grady, James J. ; Schiess, Mya C.</creatorcontrib><description>The Trail Making Test (TMT) is one of the most frequently administered neuropsychological instruments, having been used in the evaluation of cognitive dysfunction for over 50 years. Despite the measure's extensive clinical use and proliferation of research, no comprehensive review of the adult TMT normative literature is available. This report examines the available TMT normative reports and provides a summary of the sample characteristics. Significant variability between studies precludes the use of metanorms. Clinically, these findings indicate that biased results may be obtained if the most appropriate normative data set is not used and underscore the importance of identifying the normative comparison group that approximates the relevant patient characteristics. To assist the clinician, selected normative reports (based on certain exclusionary parameters) have been compiled for three nonclinical comparison groups: (a) an adolescent and young adult group (ages 15-24), (b) an adult group (ages 20-54), and (c) an older adult group (ages 55-85). Results are discussed in terms of the influence of moderator variables on TMT performance and other factors, such as procedural differences in administration, that may account for the significant variability between normative samples.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0908-4282</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-4826</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1207/s15324826an0502_2</identifier><identifier>PMID: 16318456</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc</publisher><ispartof>Applied neuropsychology, 1998-06, Vol.5 (2), p.65-73</ispartof><rights>Copyright Taylor &amp; Francis Group, LLC 1998</rights><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c331t-1d45629d6f12370cd5263ab68ab17a6b909159a6833dc9fea6392cb43331b1583</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c331t-1d45629d6f12370cd5263ab68ab17a6b909159a6833dc9fea6392cb43331b1583</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1207/s15324826an0502_2$$EPDF$$P50$$Ginformaworld$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1207/s15324826an0502_2$$EHTML$$P50$$Ginformaworld$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,59620,60409</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16318456$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Soukup, Vicki M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ingram, Fred</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grady, James J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schiess, Mya C.</creatorcontrib><title>Trail Making Test: issues in Normative Data Selection</title><title>Applied neuropsychology</title><addtitle>Appl Neuropsychol</addtitle><description>The Trail Making Test (TMT) is one of the most frequently administered neuropsychological instruments, having been used in the evaluation of cognitive dysfunction for over 50 years. Despite the measure's extensive clinical use and proliferation of research, no comprehensive review of the adult TMT normative literature is available. This report examines the available TMT normative reports and provides a summary of the sample characteristics. Significant variability between studies precludes the use of metanorms. Clinically, these findings indicate that biased results may be obtained if the most appropriate normative data set is not used and underscore the importance of identifying the normative comparison group that approximates the relevant patient characteristics. To assist the clinician, selected normative reports (based on certain exclusionary parameters) have been compiled for three nonclinical comparison groups: (a) an adolescent and young adult group (ages 15-24), (b) an adult group (ages 20-54), and (c) an older adult group (ages 55-85). Results are discussed in terms of the influence of moderator variables on TMT performance and other factors, such as procedural differences in administration, that may account for the significant variability between normative samples.</description><issn>0908-4282</issn><issn>1532-4826</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1998</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kMtOwzAQRS0EoqXwAWyQV-wCfsRujNig8pQKLChra-I4yOA4xU5B_XsStRILxGqk0bl3RgehY0rOKCPT80QFZ3nBJAQiCNNsB42HVTbsdtGYKFJkOSvYCB2k9E4IyQkX-2hEJadFLuQYiUUE5_EjfLjwhhc2dRfYpbSyCbuAn9rYQOe-LL6GDvCL9dZ0rg2HaK8Gn-zRdk7Q6-3NYnafzZ_vHmZX88xwTruMVv0NpipZU8anxFSCSQ6lLKCkU5ClIooKBbLgvDKqtiC5YqbMeZ8uqSj4BJ1uepex_ex_6nTjkrHeQ7DtKmmpmFBKyB6kG9DENqVoa72MroG41pTowZX-46rPnGzLV2Vjq9_EVk4PXG4AF-pBxHcbfaU7WPs21hGCcUnz__t_AN4Zdrc</recordid><startdate>199806</startdate><enddate>199806</enddate><creator>Soukup, Vicki M.</creator><creator>Ingram, Fred</creator><creator>Grady, James J.</creator><creator>Schiess, Mya C.</creator><general>Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>199806</creationdate><title>Trail Making Test: issues in Normative Data Selection</title><author>Soukup, Vicki M. ; Ingram, Fred ; Grady, James J. ; Schiess, Mya C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c331t-1d45629d6f12370cd5263ab68ab17a6b909159a6833dc9fea6392cb43331b1583</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1998</creationdate><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Soukup, Vicki M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ingram, Fred</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grady, James J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schiess, Mya C.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Applied neuropsychology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Soukup, Vicki M.</au><au>Ingram, Fred</au><au>Grady, James J.</au><au>Schiess, Mya C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Trail Making Test: issues in Normative Data Selection</atitle><jtitle>Applied neuropsychology</jtitle><addtitle>Appl Neuropsychol</addtitle><date>1998-06</date><risdate>1998</risdate><volume>5</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>65</spage><epage>73</epage><pages>65-73</pages><issn>0908-4282</issn><eissn>1532-4826</eissn><abstract>The Trail Making Test (TMT) is one of the most frequently administered neuropsychological instruments, having been used in the evaluation of cognitive dysfunction for over 50 years. Despite the measure's extensive clinical use and proliferation of research, no comprehensive review of the adult TMT normative literature is available. This report examines the available TMT normative reports and provides a summary of the sample characteristics. Significant variability between studies precludes the use of metanorms. Clinically, these findings indicate that biased results may be obtained if the most appropriate normative data set is not used and underscore the importance of identifying the normative comparison group that approximates the relevant patient characteristics. To assist the clinician, selected normative reports (based on certain exclusionary parameters) have been compiled for three nonclinical comparison groups: (a) an adolescent and young adult group (ages 15-24), (b) an adult group (ages 20-54), and (c) an older adult group (ages 55-85). Results are discussed in terms of the influence of moderator variables on TMT performance and other factors, such as procedural differences in administration, that may account for the significant variability between normative samples.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc</pub><pmid>16318456</pmid><doi>10.1207/s15324826an0502_2</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0908-4282
ispartof Applied neuropsychology, 1998-06, Vol.5 (2), p.65-73
issn 0908-4282
1532-4826
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmed_primary_16318456
source Taylor & Francis Journals Complete
title Trail Making Test: issues in Normative Data Selection
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-01T14%3A57%3A31IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Trail%20Making%20Test:%20issues%20in%20Normative%20Data%20Selection&rft.jtitle=Applied%20neuropsychology&rft.au=Soukup,%20Vicki%20M.&rft.date=1998-06&rft.volume=5&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=65&rft.epage=73&rft.pages=65-73&rft.issn=0908-4282&rft.eissn=1532-4826&rft_id=info:doi/10.1207/s15324826an0502_2&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E69259956%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=69259956&rft_id=info:pmid/16318456&rfr_iscdi=true