A network perspective on cognitive function and obsessive-compulsive related symptoms

BACKGROUND

The relationship between cognitive function and psychopathological symptoms has been an important research field in recent years. Previous studies have typically applied case-control designs to explore differences in certain cognitive variables. Multivariate analyses are needed to deepen our understanding of the intercorrelations among cognitive and symptom phenotypes in OCD.

METHODS

The present study used network analysis to construct networks of cognitive variables and OCD-related symptoms in patients with OCD and healthy controls (N = 226), aiming to explore the relationship among numerous cognitive function variables and OCD-related symptoms in detail and compare the network features between the two groups.

RESULTS

In the network of cognitive function and OCD-related symptoms, nodes representing IQ, letter/number span test, accuracy of task switching test and obsession were much important in the network in terms of their larger strengths and edges. By constructing the networks of these two groups respectively, there was a strong similarity except that the symptom's network in healthy group had a higher degree of overall connectivity.

LIMITATIONS

Due to the small sample size, the stability of the network cannot be guaranteed. Due to the cross-sectional nature of the data, we were unable to determine how the cognitive-symptom network would change with disease deterioration or treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study highlights the important role of variables such as obsession and IQ from a network perspective. These results deepen our understanding of the multivariate relationship between cognitive dysfunction and OCD symptoms, and may promote the prediction and diagnosis of OCD.

The Use of Cognitive Tests in the Assessment of Dyslexia

In this literature review, we address the use of cognitive tests, including intelligence tests, in the assessment and diagnosis of dyslexia, from both historic and present-day perspectives. We discuss the role of cognitive tests in the operationalization of the concepts of specificity and unexpectedness, two constructs considered essential to the characterization of dyslexia since the publication of early case reports in the late nineteenth century. We review the advantages and disadvantages of several approaches to specific learning disabilities' identification that are used in schools. We also discuss contemporary debates around the use of standardized cognitive testing in dyslexia evaluations, in particular, the arguments of those who favor an approach to diagnosis based on prior history and the results of a comprehensive evaluation and those who favor an approach based on an individual's response to intervention. We attempt to explain both perspectives by examining clinical observations and research findings. We then provide an argument for how cognitive tests can contribute to an accurate and informed diagnosis of dyslexia.

Don’t Use a Bifactor Model Unless You Believe the True Structure Is Bifactor

The current article provides a response to concerns raised by Dombrowski, McGill, Canivez, Watkins, & Beaujean (2020) regarding the methodological confounds identified by Decker, Bridges, Luedke, and Eason (2020) for using a bifactor (BF) model and Schmid–Leiman (SL) procedure in previous studies supporting a general factor of intelligence (i.e., “g”). While Dombrowski et al. (2020) raised important theoretical and practical issues, the theoretical justification for using a BF model and SL procedure to identify cognitive dimensions remain unaddressed, as well as significant concerns for using these statistical methods as the basis for informing the use of cognitive tests in clinical applications.

Dimensional Evaluation of Cognitive Measures: Methodological Confounds and Theoretical Concerns

The current study provides a methodological review of studies supporting a general factor of intelligence as the primary model for contemporary measures of cognitive abilities. A further evaluation is provided by an empirical evaluation that compares statistical estimates using different approaches in a large sample of children (ages 9–13 years, N = 780) administered a comprehensive battery of cognitive measures. Results from this study demonstrate the ramifications of using the bifactor and Schmid–Leiman (BF/SL) technique and suggest that using BF/SL methods limit interpretation of cognitive abilities to only a general factor. The inadvertent use of BF/SL methods is demonstrated to impact both model dimensionality and variance estimates for specific measures. As demonstrated in this study, conclusions from both exploratory and confirmatory studies using BF/SL methods are significantly questioned, especially for studies with a questionable theoretical basis. Guidelines for the interpretation of cognitive test scores in applied practice are discussed.

Investigating the interchangeability and clinical utility of MVPT-3 and MVPT-4 for 7-10 year children with and without specific learning disabilities

The aim of our study was to determine the sensitivity and specificity levels of MVPT-3 and MVPT-4 in 7-10 year children with specific learning disabilities (SLD) and to compare the clinical usability of these assessment tools. This study was designed as a case-controlled study. 96 ( study group = 48, control group = 48) 7-10 year children were included. The study occurred three stages. In the first place, MVPT-3 and MVPT-4 tests were examined with reference to the Core Outcome Set(COS) evaluation criteria. In the second step, the similarities and differences of MVPT-3 and MVPT-4 tests observed in clinical practices were examined by taking the feedback of experts. In the last step, in order to examine the sensitivity and specificity levels of the tests, assessments were performed in two groups with 1-week intervals. According to the COS results; MVPT-3 test was examined better than MVPT-4 test under cross-cultural validity title. The sensitivity and specificity of the MVPT-3 test were 0.68 and 0.77, and the sensitivity and specificity of MVPT-4 test were 0.50 and 0.87 respectively. This study will help clinicians working on children aged 7-10 to decide the type of test they will use to evaluate visual perception processes.

Patterns of Cognitive Strengths and Weaknesses and Relationships to Math Errors

This study investigated cognitive patterns of strengths and weaknesses (PSW) and their relationship to patterns of math errors on the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement (KTEA-3). Participants, ages 5 to 18, were selected from the KTEA-3 standardization sample if they met one of two PSW profiles: high crystallized ability (Gc) paired with low processing speed/long-term retrieval (Gs/Glr; n = 375) or high Gs/Glr paired with low Gc ( n = 309). Estimates of Gc and Gs/Glr were based on five KTEA-3 subtests that measure either Gc (e.g., Listening Comprehension) or Gs/Glr (e.g., Object Naming Facility). The two groups were then compared on math error factors. Significant differences favored the High-Gc group for factors that measure math calculation, basic math concepts, and complex computation. However, the two groups did not differ in their errors on factors that measure geometry/measurement or simple addition. Results indicated that students with different PSW profiles also differed in the kinds of errors they made on math tests.

Psychosocial and Adaptive Deficits Associated With Learning Disability Subtypes

Children with specific learning disabilities (SLD) have deficits in the basic psychological processes that interfere with learning and academic achievement, and for some SLD subtypes, these deficits can also lead to emotional and/or behavior problems. This study examined psychosocial functioning in 123 students, aged 6 to 11, who underwent comprehensive evaluations for learning and/or behavior problems in two Pacific Northwest school districts. Using concordance-discordance model (C-DM) processing strengths and weaknesses SLD identification criteria, results revealed working memory SLD (n = 20), processing speed SLD (n = 30), executive SLD (n = 32), and no disability groups (n = 41). Of the SLD subtypes, repeated measures MANOVA results revealed the processing speed SLD subtype exhibited the greatest psychosocial and adaptive impairment according to teacher behavior ratings. Findings suggest processing speed deficits may be behind the cognitive and psychosocial disturbances found in what has been termed "nonverbal" SLD. Limitations, implications, and future research needs are addressed.

Are Child Cognitive Characteristics Strong Predictors of Responses to Intervention? A Meta-Analysis

We conducted a meta-analysis of 28 studies comprising 39 samples to ask the question, "What is the magnitude of the association between various baseline child cognitive characteristics and response to reading intervention?" Studies were located via literature searches, contact with researchers in the field, and review of references from the National Reading Panel Report. Eligible participant populations included at-risk elementary school children enrolled in the third grade or below. Effects were analyzed using a shifting unit of analysis approach within three statistical models: cognitive characteristics predicting growth curve slope (Model 1, mean r = .31), gain (Model 2, mean r = .21), or postintervention reading controlling for preintervention reading (Model 3, mean r = .15). Effects were homogeneous within each model when effects were aggregated within study. The small size of the effects calls into question the practical significance and utility of using cognitive characteristics for prediction of response when baseline reading is available.

Neuropsychological Profiles of Written Expression Learning Disabilities Determined by Concordance-Discordance Model Criteria

Children with specific learning disabilities (SLD) have disparate neuropsychological processing deficits that interfere with academic achievement in spelling, writing fluency, and/or written expression (WE). Although there are multiple potential causes of WE SLD, there is a paucity of research exploring this critical academic skill from a neuropsychological perspective. This study examined the neuropsychological profiles of WE SLD subtypes defined using the concordance-discordance model (C-DM) of SLD identification. Participants were drawn from a sample of 283 children (194 boys, 89 girls) aged 6 years to 16 years old (M(age) = 9.58 years, SD = 2.29 years) referred for comprehensive neuropsychological evaluations in school settings and subsequently selected based on C-DM determined spelling, writing fluency, and WE SLD. WE SLD subtypes differed on several psychomotor, memory, and executive function measures (F range = 2.48-5.07, p range = .049 to <.001), suggesting that these children exhibit distinct patterns of neuropsychological processing strengths and weaknesses. Findings have relevance for differential diagnosis of WE subtypes, discriminating WE SLD subtypes from low WE achievement, and developing differentiated evidence-based instruction and intervention for children with WE SLD. Limitations and future research will be addressed.