Curtis Kelly L, Greve Kevin W, Bianchini Kevin J, Brennan Adrianne
University of New Orleans, LA 70148, USA.
Assessment. 2006 Mar;13(1):46-61. doi: 10.1177/1073191105285210.
The present study used well-defined traumatic brain injury (TBI) and mixed neurological (other than TBI) and psychiatric samples to examine the specificity and sensitivity to Malingered Neurocognitive Dysfunction (MND) of four individual California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT) variables and eight composite CVLT malingering indicators. Participants were 275 traumatic brain injury and 352 general clinical patients seen for neuropsychological evaluation. The TBI patients were assigned to one of five groups using the Slick, Sherman, and Iverson (1999) criteria: no incentive, incentive only, suspect, and malingering (both Probable MND and Definite MND). Within TBI, persons with the strongest evidence for malingering (Probable and Definite) had the most extreme scores. Good sensitivity (approximately 50%) in the context of excellent specificity (> 95%) was found in the TBI samples. Issues related to the appropriate clinical application of these data are discussed.
本研究使用明确界定的创伤性脑损伤（TBI）样本、混合性神经疾病（非TBI）样本以及精神疾病样本，来检验加利福尼亚语言学习测验（CVLT）的四个单项变量和八个综合CVLT伪装指标对伪装性神经认知功能障碍（MND）的特异性和敏感性。参与者包括275名接受神经心理学评估的创伤性脑损伤患者和352名普通临床患者。采用斯利克、谢尔曼和艾弗森（1999年）的标准，将TBI患者分为五组：无动机组、仅有动机组、可疑组以及伪装组（可能的MND组和确诊的MND组）。在TBI患者中，伪装证据最充分（可能的和确诊的）的人得分最为极端。在TBI样本中，发现这些指标在具有极高特异性（>95%）的情况下，具有良好的敏感性（约50%）。本文还讨论了与这些数据的适当临床应用相关的问题。
