"Must try harder." Is effort and performance validity testing a necessary part of pediatric neuropsychological assessment?

Performance and Symptom Validity in Outpatient Pediatric Neuropsychological Evaluations

This study aimed to clarify the value of using different types of validity measures in pediatric neuropsychological evaluations. We examined the relationship between performance (PVT) and symptom (SVT) validity tests as well as demographic variables and results from a screening test of learning and memory (i.e. Child and Adolescent Memory Profile [ChAMP]) in a mixed pediatric sample (n = 103). There was minimal overlap between PVT and SVT failures. Regression analyses demonstrated that PVT results, parental education, and history of special education were statistically significant predictors of ChAMP results, whereas SVT results were not.

New Child and Adolescent Memory Profile Embedded Performance Validity Test

OBJECTIVE

It is essential to interpret performance validity tests (PVTs) that are well-established and have strong psychometrics. This study evaluated the Child and Adolescent Memory Profile (ChAMP) Validity Indicator (VI) using a pediatric sample with traumatic brain injury (TBI).

METHOD

A cross-sectional sample of N = 110 youth (mean age = 15.1 years, standard deviation [SD] = 2.4 range = 8-18) on average 32.7 weeks (SD = 40.9) post TBI (71.8% mild/concussion; 3.6% complicated mild; 24.6% moderate-to-severe) were administered the ChAMP and two stand-alone PVTs. Criterion for valid performance was scores above cutoffs on both PVTs; criterion for invalid performance was scores below cutoffs on both PVTs. Classification statistics were used to evaluate the existing ChAMP VI and establish a new VI cutoff score if needed.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in demographics or time since injury between those deemed valid (n = 96) or invalid (n = 14), but all ChAMP scores were significantly lower in those deemed invalid. The original ChAMP VI cutoff score was highly specific (no false positives) but also highly insensitive (sensitivity [SN] = .07, specificity [SP] = 1.0). Based on area under the curve (AUC) analysis (0.94), a new cutoff score was established using the sum of scaled scores (VI-SS). A ChAMP VI-SS score of 32 or lower achieved strong SN (86%) and SP (92%). Using a 15% base rate, positive predictive value was 64% and negative predictive value was 97%.

CONCLUSIONS

The originally proposed ChAMP VI has insufficient SN in pediatric TBI. However, this study yields a promising new ChAMP VI-SS, with classification metrics that exceed any other current embedded PVT in pediatrics.