Further Validation of the Pillbox Test in a Mixed Clinical Sample

Conceptualization of the term "ecological validity" in neuropsychological research on executive function assessment: a systematic review and call to action

OBJECTIVE

"Ecological validity" (EV) is classically defined as test's ability to predict real-world functioning, either alone or together with test's similarity to real-world tasks. In neuropsychological literature on assessment of executive functions (EF), EV is conceptualized inconsistently, leading to misconceptions about the utility of tests. The goal of this systematic review was to examine how EV is conceptualized in studies of EF tests described as ecologically valid.

METHOD

MEDLINE and PsychINFO Databases were searched. PRISMA guidelines were observed. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, this search yielded 90 articles. Deductive content analysis was employed to determine how the term EV was used.

RESULTS

About 1/3 of the studies conceptualized EV as the test's ability to predict functional outcomes, 1/3 as both the ability to predict functional outcome and similarity to real-world tasks, and 1/3 were either unclear about the meaning of the term or relied on notions unrelated to classical definitions (e.g., similarity to real-world tasks alone, association with other tests, or the ability to discriminate between populations).

CONCLUSIONS

Conceptualizations of the term EV in literature on EF assessment vary grossly, subsuming the notions of criterion, construct, and face validity, as well as sensitivity/specificity. Such inconsistency makes it difficult to interpret clinical utility of tests that are described as ecologically valid. We call on the field to require that, at minimum, the term EV be clearly defined in all publications, or replaced with more concrete terminology (e.g., criterion validity).

Integration of Neuropsychological Services in a VA HIV Primary Care Clinic

The Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) is the largest health care provider for individuals with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), with >28,000 Veterans with HIV/AIDS enrolled in care. Advances in medical treatment have improved the life-limiting effects of the disease, though many chronic symptoms persist. Comprehensive care is critical to manage the diverse constellation of symptoms. However, many patients face challenges to receiving optimal care due to limited resources, mistrust of health care providers, and/or co-occurring medical, psychiatric, and substance use disorders. The VA is a leader in developing integrated models of care to address these barriers. The inclusion of subspecialty mental health and substance abuse treatment in HIV care has been implemented across many VAs, with evidence of improved patient outcomes. However, neuropsychology has not traditionally been included, despite the fact that cognitive dysfunction represents one of the most ubiquitous complications of HIV/AIDS. Cognitive impairment is associated with myriad negative outcomes including medication non-adherence, reduced quality of life, and increased mortality. We contend that neuropsychologists are uniquely equipped to contribute to the comprehensive care of patients with HIV/AIDS. Neuropsychologists understand the range of factors that can impact cognition and have the requisite knowledge and skills to assess and treat cognitive dysfunction. Although we focus on HIV/AIDS, neuropsychologists often play critical roles in the provision of care for other infectious diseases (e.g., hepatitis C).