• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

这只需一分钟:在霍普金斯词语学习测验修订版的迫选再认测验中,时间截定点优于准确度截定点。

This will only take a minute: Time cutoffs are superior to accuracy cutoffs on the forced choice recognition trial of the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test - Revised.

机构信息

Department of Psychology, Neuropsychology Track, University of Windsor, Windsor, ON, Canada.

Jefferson Neurobehavioral Group, New Orleans, LA, USA.

出版信息

Appl Neuropsychol Adult. 2022 Nov-Dec;29(6):1425-1439. doi: 10.1080/23279095.2021.1884555. Epub 2021 Feb 25.

DOI:10.1080/23279095.2021.1884555
PMID:33631077
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study was designed to evaluate the classification accuracy of the recently introduced forced-choice recognition trial to the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test - Revised (FCR) as a performance validity test (PVT) in a clinical sample. Time-to-completion (T2C) for FCR was also examined.

METHOD

Forty-three students were assigned to either the control or the experimental malingering (MAL) condition. Archival data were collected from 52 adults clinically referred for neuropsychological assessment. Invalid performance was defined using MAL status, two free-standing PVTs and two validity composites.

RESULTS

Among students, FCR ≤11 or T2C ≥45 seconds was specific (0.86-0.93) to invalid performance. Among patients, an FCR ≤11 was specific (0.94-1.00), but relatively insensitive (0.38-0.60) to non-credible responding0. T2C ≥35 s produced notably higher sensitivity (0.71-0.89), but variable specificity (0.83-0.96). The T2C achieved superior overall correct classification (81-86%) compared to the accuracy score (68-77%). The FCR provided incremental utility in performance validity assessment compared to previously introduced validity cutoffs on Recognition Discrimination.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined with T2C, the FCR has the potential to function as a quick, inexpensive and effective embedded PVT. The time-cutoff effectively attenuated the low ceiling of the accuracy scores, increasing sensitivity by 19%. Replication in larger and more geographically and demographically diverse samples is needed before the FCR can be endorsed for routine clinical application.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估最近引入的霍普金斯词语学习测验修订版(Hopkins Verbal Learning Test - Revised,HVLT-R)中的迫选再认测验(Forced-choice recognition trial,FCR)作为一种临床样本中的表现效度测验(Performance validity test,PVT)的分类准确性。还检查了 FCR 的完成时间(Time-to-completion,T2C)。

方法

43 名学生被分配到对照组或实验性诈病(Malingering,MAL)组。从 52 名临床转介进行神经心理评估的成年人中收集档案数据。无效表现使用 MAL 状态、两个独立的 PVT 和两个有效性综合指标来定义。

结果

在学生中,FCR≤11 或 T2C≥45 秒对无效表现具有特异性(0.86-0.93)。在患者中,FCR≤11 是特异性的(0.94-1.00),但相对不敏感(0.38-0.60)到不可信的反应。T2C≥35 秒可产生显著更高的敏感性(0.71-0.89),但特异性(0.83-0.96)可变。T2C 的整体正确分类(81-86%)优于准确性得分(68-77%)。与先前介绍的识别辨别有效性截止值相比,FCR 在表现有效性评估中提供了额外的效用。

结论

与 T2C 结合使用,FCR 有可能成为一种快速、廉价且有效的嵌入式 PVT。时间截止有效地降低了准确性得分的低上限,使敏感性提高了 19%。在 FCR 可用于常规临床应用之前,需要在更大、更具地理和人口统计学多样性的样本中进行复制。

相似文献

1
This will only take a minute: Time cutoffs are superior to accuracy cutoffs on the forced choice recognition trial of the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test - Revised.这只需一分钟:在霍普金斯词语学习测验修订版的迫选再认测验中,时间截定点优于准确度截定点。
Appl Neuropsychol Adult. 2022 Nov-Dec;29(6):1425-1439. doi: 10.1080/23279095.2021.1884555. Epub 2021 Feb 25.
2
Introducing a forced choice recognition trial to the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test - Revised.将强制选择识别试验引入修订版的霍普金斯言语学习测验。
Clin Neuropsychol. 2021 Nov;35(8):1442-1470. doi: 10.1080/13854046.2020.1779348. Epub 2020 Jul 13.
3
Examining independent and combined accuracy of embedded performance validity tests in the California Verbal Learning Test-II and Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised for detecting invalid performance.检验加利福尼亚言语学习测验第二版(California Verbal Learning Test-II)和修订版简短视觉空间记忆测验(Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised)中嵌入式效标效度测验在检测无效表现方面的独立及综合准确性。
Appl Neuropsychol Adult. 2022 Mar-Apr;29(2):252-261. doi: 10.1080/23279095.2020.1742718. Epub 2020 Mar 23.
4
Embedded performance validity tests within the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test - Revised and the Brief Visuospatial Memory Test - Revised.在修订版霍普金斯言语学习测验和修订版简要视觉空间记忆测验中嵌入了效标效度测验。
Clin Neuropsychol. 2017 Jan;31(1):207-218. doi: 10.1080/13854046.2016.1245787. Epub 2016 Oct 19.
5
Multivariable analysis of the relative utility and additive value of eight embedded performance validity tests for classifying invalid neuropsychological test performance.多变量分析八项嵌入式绩效有效性测试在分类无效神经心理测试表现方面的相对效用和附加价值。
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2022 Sep;44(7):451-460. doi: 10.1080/13803395.2022.2128067. Epub 2022 Oct 5.
6
Psychometric implications of failure on one performance validity test: a cross-validation study to inform criterion group definition.一项性能有效性测试失败的心理计量学意义:一项交叉验证研究,为标准组定义提供信息。
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2021 Jul;43(5):437-448. doi: 10.1080/13803395.2021.1945540. Epub 2021 Jul 8.
7
Flipping the Script: Measuring Both Performance Validity and Cognitive Ability with the Forced Choice Recognition Trial of the RCFT.翻转脚本:使用 RCFT 的迫选识别试验同时测量绩效有效性和认知能力。
Percept Mot Skills. 2021 Aug;128(4):1373-1408. doi: 10.1177/00315125211019704. Epub 2021 May 22.
8
Verbal fluency and digit span variables as performance validity indicators in experimentally induced malingering and real world patients with TBI.作为实验性诱导诈病和真实世界创伤性脑损伤患者表现效度指标的语言流畅性和数字广度变量。
Appl Neuropsychol Child. 2020 Oct-Dec;9(4):337-354. doi: 10.1080/21622965.2020.1719409. Epub 2020 Feb 21.
9
The power of timing: Adding a time-to-completion cutoff to the Word Choice Test and Recognition Memory Test improves classification accuracy.时机的力量:在词汇选择测试和识别记忆测试中增加完成时间限制可提高分类准确性。
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2017 May;39(4):369-383. doi: 10.1080/13803395.2016.1230181. Epub 2016 Sep 22.
10
Reexamining performance validity cutoffs within the Complex Ideational Material and the Boston Naming Test-Short Form using an experimental malingering paradigm.使用实验性伪装范式重新审视复杂意念材料和波士顿命名测验-简短形式中的表现有效性截止值。
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2019 Feb;41(1):15-25. doi: 10.1080/13803395.2018.1483488. Epub 2018 Jun 26.

引用本文的文献

1
Clinical Outcome Assessment Tools for Evaluating the Management of Gliomas.用于评估胶质瘤治疗的临床结局评估工具
Cancers (Basel). 2025 May 14;17(10):1659. doi: 10.3390/cancers17101659.
2
Multivariate Models of Performance Validity: The Erdodi Index Captures the Dual Nature of Non-Credible Responding (Continuous and Categorical).多元表现效度模型:埃尔多迪指数捕捉到不可信反应的双重性质(连续和分类)。
Assessment. 2023 Jul;30(5):1467-1485. doi: 10.1177/10731911221101910. Epub 2022 Jun 25.
3
Flipping the Script: Measuring Both Performance Validity and Cognitive Ability with the Forced Choice Recognition Trial of the RCFT.
翻转脚本:使用 RCFT 的迫选识别试验同时测量绩效有效性和认知能力。
Percept Mot Skills. 2021 Aug;128(4):1373-1408. doi: 10.1177/00315125211019704. Epub 2021 May 22.