Exploring Subfactors of Adult Cognitive Disengagement Syndrome and Impact on Neuropsychological Performance

OBJECTIVE

This study investigated subfactors of cognitive disengagement syndrome (CDS; previously referred as sluggish cognitive tempo) among adults referred for neuropsychological evaluation of attentiondeficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

METHOD

Retrospective analyses of data from 164 outpatient neuropsychological evaluations examined associations between CDS subfactors and self-reported psychological symptoms and cognitive performance.

RESULTS

Factor analysis produced two distinct but positively correlated constructs: "Cognitive Complaints'' and "Lethargy." Both correlated positively with symptom reports (rs = 0.26-0.57). Cognitive Complaints correlated negatively with working memory, processing speed, and executive functioning performance (rs = -0.21 to -0.37), whereas Lethargy correlated negatively only with processing speed and executive functioning performance (rs = -0.26 to -0.42). Both predicted depression symptoms, but only Cognitive Complaints predicted inattention symptoms. Both subfactors demonstrated modest to nonsignificant associations with cognitive performance after accounting for estimated premorbid intelligence and inattention.

CONCLUSION

Findings indicate a bidimensional conceptualization of CDS, with differential associations between its constituent subfactors, reported symptoms, and cognitive performance.

Cross-validating the Clinical Assessment of Attention Deficit-Adult symptom validity scales for assessment of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder in adults

INTRODUCTION

The Clinical Assessment of Attention Deficit-Adult is among the few questionnaires that offer validity indicators (i.e., Negative Impression [NI], Infrequency [IF], and Positive Impression [PI]) for classifying underreporting and overreporting of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms. This is the first study to cross-validate the NI, IF, and PI scales in a sample of adults with suspected or known ADHD.

METHOD

Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to examine the independent and combined value of the NI, IF, and PI scores in predicting invalid symptom reporting and neurocognitive performance in a sample of 543 adults undergoing ADHD evaluation.

RESULTS

The NI scale demonstrated better classification accuracy than the IF scale in discriminating patients with and without valid scores on measures of overreporting. Only NI scores significantly predicted validity status when used in combination with IF scores. Optimal cut-scores for the NI (≤51; 30% sensitivity / 90% specificity) and IF (≥4; 18% sensitivity / 90% specificity) scales were consistent with those reported in the original manual; however, these indicators poorly discriminated patients with invalid and valid neurocognitive performance. The PI scale demonstrated acceptable classification accuracy in discriminating patients with invalid and valid scores on measures of underreporting, albeit with an optimal cut-score (≥27; 36% sensitivity / 90% specificity) lower than that described in the manual.

CONCLUSION

Findings provide preliminary evidence of construct validity for these scales as embedded validity indicators of symptom overreporting and underreporting. However, these scales should not be used to guide clinical judgment regarding the validity of neurocognitive test performance.

The Impact of Adverse Childhood Experiences on Symptom and Performance Validity Tests Among a Multiracial Sample Presenting for ADHD Evaluation

OBJECTIVE

Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are commonly reported in individuals presenting for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) evaluation. Performance validity tests (PVTs) and symptom validity tests (SVTs) are essential to ADHD evaluations in young adults, but extant research suggests that those who report ACEs may be inaccurately classified as invalid on these measures. The current study aimed to assess the degree to which ACE exposure differentiated PVT and SVT performance and ADHD symptom reporting in a multi-racial sample of adults presenting for ADHD evaluation.

METHOD

This study included 170 adults referred for outpatient neuropsychological ADHD evaluation who completed the ACE Checklist and a neurocognitive battery that included multiple PVTs and SVTs. Analysis of variance was used to examine differences in PVT and SVT performance among those with high (≥4) and low (≤3) reported ACEs.

RESULTS

Main effects of the ACE group were observed, such that high ACE group reporting demonstrated higher scores on SVTs assessing ADHD symptom over-reporting and infrequent psychiatric and somatic symptoms on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form. Conversely, no significant differences emerged in total PVT failures across ACE groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Those with high ACE exposure were more likely to have higher scores on SVTs assessing over-reporting and infrequent responses. In contrast, ACE exposure did not affect PVT performance. Thus, ACE exposure should be considered specifically when evaluating SVT performance in the context of ADHD evaluations, and more work is needed to understand factors that contribute to different patterns of symptom reporting as a function of ACE exposure.

The Effect of Adverse Childhood Experiences on ADHD Symptom Reporting, Psychological Symptoms, and Cognitive Performance Among Adult Neuropsychological Referrals

OBJECTIVE

Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are early life experiences that influence mental health outcomes, though there are mixed findings reported in relation to attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms. The current study compared adults who experienced ACEs on measures of ADHD symptom reporting, psychological symptoms, and neurocognitive test performance.

METHOD

The sample (n = 115) had mean age of 28.42 (SD = 6.46); educational attainment of 16.47 years (SD = 1.99); and was 35% male/65% female and racially/ethnically diverse. Participants completed measures of ACEs, ADHD symptoms, psychopathology, and perceived stress, as well as neuropsychological tests.

RESULTS

The high ACEs group endorsed higher levels of childhood/adulthood inattentive, impulsive, and hyperactive symptoms, and overall childhood symptoms when compared to the low ACEs group.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a more comprehensive understanding of the association between ACEs and cognitive/mental health outcomes. Greater ACEs resulted in higher ADHD symptom reporting but not significantly greater psychological symptoms or worse neurocognitive performance.

Cognitive Profile Discrepancies among Typical University Students and Those with Dyslexia and Mixed-Type Learning Disorder

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have identified areas of cognitive weakness in children diagnosed with Specific Learning Disorder (SLD), in the areas of working memory and processing speed in particular. In adulthood, this literature is still scant, and no studies have compared the cognitive profile of university students with dyslexia (DD) with that of students with Mixed-type SLD.

METHOD

Thus, in this study, the WAIS-IV was used to examine the cognitive functioning of three groups of university students: students with DD, with Mixed-type SLD, and typical students. Statistical analyses were performed to examine differences in WAIS-IV FSIQ, main, and additional indexes and subtests.

RESULTS

The results showed strengths in perceptual reasoning and good verbal comprehension abilities in both the DD and Mixed-type SLD group, with weaknesses in working memory and processing speed, leading to a pattern of a better General Ability Index (GAI) than Cognitive Proficiency Index (CPI) in both clinical groups. Thus, discrepancies between GAI and CPI, well documented in children with SLD, still manifest in adulthood in university students. Our findings also revealed worse cognitive performance in university students with mixed learning disorder relative to students with only a reading deficit.

CONCLUSIONS

The cognitive features and distinctive subtest profiles that emerged should guide the assessment and the definitions of intervention programs, special educational needs, and strategies of compensation.

Cognitive Underperformance in a Mixed Neuropsychiatric Sample at Diagnostic Evaluation of Adult ADHD

(1) Background: The clinical assessment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adulthood is known to show non-trivial base rates of noncredible performance and requires thorough validity assessment. (2) Objectives: The present study estimated base rates of noncredible performance in clinical evaluations of adult ADHD on one or more of 17 embedded validity indicators (EVIs). This study further examines the effect of the order of test administration on EVI failure rates, the association between cognitive underperformance and symptom overreporting, and the prediction of cognitive underperformance by clinical information. (3) Methods: A mixed neuropsychiatric sample (N = 464, ADHD = 227) completed a comprehensive neuropsychological assessment battery on the Vienna Test System (VTS; CFADHD). Test performance allows the computation of 17 embedded performance validity indicators (PVTs) derived from eight different neuropsychological tests. Further, all participants completed several self- and other-report symptom rating scales assessing depressive symptoms and cognitive functioning. The Conners' Adult ADHD Rating Scale and the Beck Depression Inventory-II were administered to derive embedded symptom validity measures (SVTs). (4) Results and conclusion: Noncredible performance occurs in a sizeable proportion of about 10% up to 30% of individuals throughout the entire battery. Tests for attention and concentration appear to be the most adequate and sensitive for detecting underperformance. Cognitive underperformance represents a coherent construct and seems dissociable from symptom overreporting. These results emphasize the importance of performing multiple PVTs, at different time points, and promote more accurate calculation of the positive and negative predictive values of a given validity measure for noncredible performance during clinical assessments. Future studies should further examine whether and how the present results stand in other clinical populations, by implementing rigorous reference standards of noncredible performance, characterizing those failing PVT assessments, and differentiating between underlying motivations.

Base rates of non-credible performance in a post-secondary student sample seeking accessibility accommodations

Objective: Performance Validity Tests (PVTs) have been used to identify non-credible performance in clinical, medicolegal, forensic, and, more recently, academic settings. The inclusion of PVTs when administering psychoeducational assessments is essential given that specific accommodation such as flexible deadlines and increased writing time can provide an external incentive for students without disabilities to feign symptoms. Method: The present study used archival data to establish base rates of non-credible performance in a sample of post-secondary students (n = 1045) who underwent a comprehensive psychoeducational evaluation for the purposes of obtaining academic accommodations. In accordance with current guidelines, non-credible performance was determined by failure on two or more freestanding or embedded PVTs. Results: 9.4% of participants failed at least two of the PVTs they were administered, of which 8.5% failed two PVTs, and approximately 1% failed three PVTs. Base rates of failure for specific PVTs ranged from 25% (b Test) to 11.2% (TOVA). Conclusions: The present study found a lower base rate of non-credible performance than previously observed in comparable populations. This likely reflects the utilization of conservative criteria in detecting non-credible performance to avoid false positives. By contrast, inconsistent base rates previously found in the literature may reflect inconsistent methodologies. These results further emphasize the importance of administering multiple PVTs during psychoeducational assessments. The implications of these findings can further inform clinicians administering assessments in academic settings and aid in the appropriate utilization of PVTs in psychoeducational evaluation to determine accessibility accommodations.

Performance and symptom validity assessment in attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder: Base rates of invalidity, concordance, and relative impact on cognitive performance

Objective: Differential diagnosis of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common referral questions for neuropsychological evaluation but is complicated by the presence of external incentives. Validity assessment is therefore critical in such evaluations, employing symptom validity tests (SVTs) and performance validity tests (PVTs) to assess the validity of reported symptoms and cognitive test performance, respectively. This study aimed to establish the base rate of symptom and performance invalidity in adults referred for ADHD, compare concordance between performance and symptom validity, and assess the impact of each type of validity on cognitive test performance. Method: This consecutive case series included data from 392 demographically-diverse adults who underwent outpatient neuropsychological evaluation for ADHD. All patients were administered the Clinical Assessment of Attention Deficit-Adult (CAT-A) and a uniform cognitive test battery, including seven PVTs. Results: Invalid symptom reporting and PVT performance were found in 22% and 16% of the sample, respectively. Sixty-eight percent had concordantly valid SVTs/PVTs and 6% had invalid SVTs/PVTs, whereas the remaining 26% had either invalid SVTs or PVTs (but not both). Invalid PVT performance resulted in a significant decrease across all cognitive test scores, with generally large effects (ηp2=.01-.18). Invalid symptom reporting had minimal effects on cognitive test performance (ηp2= ≤.04). Conclusions: PVTs and SVTs are dissociable and therefore should not be used interchangeably in the context of adult ADHD evaluations. Rather, symptom and performance validity should continue to be assessed independently as they provide largely non-redundant information.

Multivariate examination of embedded indicators of performance validity for ADHD evaluations: A targeted approach

This study investigated the individual and combined utility of 10 embedded validity indicators (EVIs) within executive functioning, attention/working memory, and processing speed measures in 585 adults referred for an attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) evaluation. Participants were categorized into invalid and valid performance groups as determined by scores from empirical performance validity indicators. Analyses revealed that all of the EVIs could meaningfully discriminate invalid from valid performers (AUCs = .69-.78), with high specificity (≥90%) but low sensitivity (19%-51%). However, none of them explained more than 20% of the variance in validity status. Combining any of these 10 EVIs into a multivariate model significantly improved classification accuracy, explaining up to 36% of the variance in validity status. Integrating six EVIs from the Stroop Color and Word Test, Trail Making Test, Verbal Fluency Test, and Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth Edition was as efficacious (AUC = .86) as using all 10 EVIs together. Failing any two of these six EVIs or any three of the 10 EVIs yielded clinically acceptable specificity (≥90%) with moderate sensitivity (60%). Findings support the use of multivariate models to improve the identification of performance invalidity in ADHD evaluations, but chaining multiple EVIs may only be helpful to an extent.

Does comorbid depression impact executive functioning (EF) in adults diagnosed with ADHD?: a comparison of EF across diagnoses in clinically-referred individuals

INTRODUCTION

Executive functioning (EF) is a salient factor in both ADHD as well as depressive disorders. However, sparse literature has examined whether depression severity impacts EF concurrently among adults with ADHD. The goal of this study was to examine differences in EF between adult patients diagnosed with ADHD and those diagnosed with a non-ADHD primary psychopathological condition, as a function of both ADHD presentation and depression severity in a diverse clinical sample.

METHOD

This crosssectional study included 404 adult patients clinically referred for neuropsychological evaluation to assist with differential diagnosis and/or treatment planning related to known or suspected ADHD. Various EF tasks and a measure of depression severity were administered. One-way MANOVA analyses were conducted to compare EF performance between individuals diagnosed with ADHD or a non-ADHD primary psychopathological condition, with additional analyses examining group differences based on ADHD presentation and depression severity. Regression analyses also examined the potential contribution of depression severity to each EF measure within each group.

RESULTS

No significant EF performance differences were found when comparing individuals diagnosed with ADHD and those with a non-ADHD primary psychopathological condition, nor based on ADHD presentation. When comparing across groups using cut-offs for high or low depression, only one EF measure showed significant differences between groups. Further, depression severity generally did not predict reduced EF performances with the exception of verbal fluency and working memory performances in select groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that individuals with ADHD generally perform comparably on EF measures regardless of the presence or absence of comorbid depression. These results suggest further examination of EF deficits when they emerge for adults with ADHD, especially beyond comorbid depression severity.

Feigning Adult ADHD on a Comprehensive Neuropsychological Test Battery: An Analogue Study

The evaluation of performance validity is an essential part of any neuropsychological evaluation. Validity indicators embedded in routine neuropsychological tests offer a time-efficient option for sampling performance validity throughout the assessment while reducing vulnerability to coaching. By administering a comprehensive neuropsychological test battery to 57 adults with ADHD, 60 neurotypical controls, and 151 instructed simulators, we examined each test's utility in detecting noncredible performance. Cut-off scores were derived for all available outcome variables. Although all ensured at least 90% specificity in the ADHD Group, sensitivity differed significantly between tests, ranging from 0% to 64.9%. Tests of selective attention, vigilance, and inhibition were most useful in detecting the instructed simulation of adult ADHD, whereas figural fluency and task switching lacked sensitivity. Five or more test variables demonstrating results in the second to fourth percentile were rare among cases of genuine adult ADHD but identified approximately 58% of instructed simulators.

Assessment of learning and memory impairments in adults with predominately inattentive versus combined presentation attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

This cross-sectional study compared adults diagnosed with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder-Inattentive (ADHD-I) and ADHD-Combined (ADHD-C) presentations with a non-ADHD group on verbal and visual learning and delayed recall using the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) and Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised (BVMT-R), respectively. Data from 380 predominately college student adult outpatients were used, with 155 who met criteria for ADHD-I, 165 who met criteria for ADHD-C, and 60 who did not meet criteria for ADHD but were diagnosed with a primary depressive or anxiety disorder or received no diagnosis. Each patient was administered the RAVLT and BVMT-R as part of a comprehensive neuropsychological evaluation. Significant main effects of study group were found, such that patients with ADHD-C demonstrated worse learning and delayed recall of both verbal and visual information than patients with ADHD-I and the non-ADHD group. Patients with ADHD-I performed comparably to the non-ADHD group, apart from visual learning and delayed recall. Notably, more patients in the ADHD groups had possible or probable learning and memory impairment compared to the non-ADHD group. Findings were consistent with previous research indicating that those with ADHD exhibit poorer verbal and visual learning and delayed recall than those without ADHD.

Settling the Score: Can CPT-3 Embedded Validity Indicators Distinguish Between Credible and Non-Credible Responders Referred for ADHD and/or SLD?

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the present study was to further investigate the clinical utility of individual and composite indicators within the CPT-3 as embedded validity indicators (EVIs) given the discrepant findings of previous investigations.

METHODS

A total of 201 adults undergoing psychoeducational evaluation for ADHD and/or Specific Learning Disorder (SLD) were divided into credible (n = 159) and non-credible (n = 42) groups based on five criterion measures.

RESULTS

Receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC) revealed that 5/9 individual indicators and 2/4 composite indicators met minimally acceptable classification accuracy of ≥0.70 (AUC = 0.43-0.78). Individual (0.16-0.45) and composite indicators (0.23-0.35) demonstrated low sensitivity when using cutoffs that maintained specificity ≥90%.

CONCLUSION

Given the lack of stability across studies, further research is needed before recommending any specific cutoff be used in clinical practice with individuals seeking psychoeducational assessment.

A Direct Comparison of 10 WAIS-IV Digit Span Embedded Validity Indicators among a Mixed Neuropsychiatric Sample with Varying Degrees of Cognitive Impairment

Objective

Reliable Digit Span (RDS), RDS-Revised (RDS-R), and age-corrected scaled score (ACSS) have been previously validated as embedded performance validity tests (PVTs) from the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-IV Digit Span subtest (WAIS-IV DS). However, few studies have directly compared the relative utility of these and other proposed WAIS-IV DS validity indicators within a single sample.

Method

This study compared classification accuracies of 10 WAIS-IV DS indices in a mixed neuropsychiatric sample of 227 outpatients who completed a standardized neuropsychological battery. Participants with ≤1 PVT failures of the four, freestanding criterion PVTs constituted the valid group (n = 181), whereas those with ≥2 PVT failures formed the invalid group (n = 46). Among the valid group, 113 met criteria for mild cognitive impairment (MCI).

Results

Classification accuracies for all DS indicators were statistically significant across the overall sample and subsamples with and without MCI, apart from indices derived from the Forward trial in the MCI sample. DS Sequencing ACSS, working memory RDS (wmRDS), and DS ACSS emerged as the most effective predictors of validity status, with acceptable to excellent classification accuracy for the overall sample (AUCs = 0.792–0.816; 35%–50% sensitivity/88%–96% specificity).

Conclusions

Although most DS indices demonstrated clinical utility as embedded PVTs, DS Sequencing ACSS, wmRDS, and DS ACSS may be particularly robust to cognitive impairment, minimizing risk of false positive errors while identifying noncredible performance. Moreover, DS indices incorporating data from multiple trials (i.e., wmRDS, DS ACSS) also generally yielded greater classification accuracy than those derived from a single trial.