Babikian Talin, Boone Kyle Brauer, Lu Po, Arnold Ginger
Department of Psychology, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA, USA.
Clin Neuropsychol. 2006 Feb;20(1):145-59. doi: 10.1080/13854040590947362.
Digit Span Age-Corrected Scaled Score (ACSS) and Reliable Digit Span (RDS) have been suggested as effective in assessing credibility. The purpose of this study was to confirm the efficacy of suggested cutoffs for ACSS and RDS and to explore the utility of other Digit Span variables in a large sample (N = 66) of "real-world" > or = suspect effort patients versus clinic patients with no motive to feign (N = 56) and controls (N = 32). With specificity at > or = 90%, sensitivity of ACSS increased from 32% to 42% when a < or = 5 cutoff was used instead of the recommended < or = 4. The RDS recommended cutoff of < or = 7 resulted in a sensitivity of 62% but with an unacceptably high false positive rate (23%); dropping the cutoff to < or = 6 raised the specificity to 93% but sensitivity fell to 45%. Cutoffs for other Digit Span scores did not exceed 45% sensitivity with the exception of 50% sensitivity (11% false positive rate) for average time per digit for all attempted items > 1.0 second. A criterion of ACSS < or = 5 or RDS < or = 6 was associated with 51% sensitivity (91% specificity) while RDS < or = 6 or longest string with at least one item correct < or = 4 was associated with 54% sensitivity (88% specificity). While only moderately sensitive, Digit Span scores, including new time variables, may have a unique and effective role in the detection of suspect effort.
数字广度年龄校正量表分数(ACSS)和可靠数字广度(RDS)已被认为在评估可信度方面有效。本研究的目的是确认ACSS和RDS建议临界值的有效性,并在一个由66名“现实世界”中≥疑似低努力程度患者、56名无伪装动机的门诊患者和32名对照组成的大样本中探索其他数字广度变量的效用。当特异性≥90%时,使用≤5的临界值而非推荐的≤4时,ACSS的敏感性从32%提高到42%。RDS建议的临界值≤7时,敏感性为62%,但假阳性率高得不可接受(23%);将临界值降至≤6时,特异性提高到93%,但敏感性降至45%。除了所有尝试项目的平均每数字时间>1.0秒时敏感性为50%(假阳性率为11%)外,其他数字广度分数的临界值敏感性均未超过45%。ACSS≤5或RDS≤6的标准敏感性为51%(特异性为91%),而RDS≤6或至少有一个项目正确的最长串≤4的敏感性为54%(特异性为88%)。虽然数字广度分数的敏感性仅为中等,但包括新的时间变量在内,其在检测疑似低努力程度方面可能具有独特且有效的作用。