Innovation, Implementation and Clinical Translation (IIMPACT) in Health.
School of Health Sciences.
Neuropsychology. 2022 Jul;36(5):347-372. doi: 10.1037/neu0000796. Epub 2022 Apr 7.
Cognitive flexibility has been previously described as the ability to adjust cognitive and behavioral strategies in response to changing contextual demands. Cognitive flexibility is typically assessed via self-report questionnaires and performance on neuropsychological tests in research and clinical practice. A common assumption among researchers and clinicians is that self-report and neuropsychological tests of cognitive flexibility assess the same or similar constructs, but the extent of the relationship between these two assessment approaches in clinical cohorts remains unknown. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the relationship between self-report and neuropsychological tests of cognitive flexibility in clinical samples.
We searched 10 databases and relevant gray literature (e.g., other databases and pearling) from inception to October 2020 and used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting guidelines. Eleven articles including 405 participants satisfied our eligibility criteria.
A multilevel random-effects meta-analysis revealed no relationship between self-report and neuropsychological tests of cognitive flexibility (0.01, 95% CI [-0.16 to 0.18]). Individual random-effects meta-analyses between 12 different tests pairs also found no relationship.
Based on our results, it is clear that the two assessment approaches of cognitive flexibility provide independent information-they do not assess the same construct. These findings have important ramifications for future research and clinical practice-there is a need to reconsider what constructs self-report and neuropsychological tests of "cognitive flexibility" actually assess, and avoid the interchangeable use of these assessments in clinical samples. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
认知灵活性以前被描述为根据变化的上下文需求调整认知和行为策略的能力。认知灵活性通常通过自我报告问卷和神经心理学测试在研究和临床实践中进行评估。研究人员和临床医生的一个共同假设是,自我报告和认知灵活性的神经心理学测试评估的是相同或相似的结构,但这两种评估方法在临床队列中的关系程度尚不清楚。我们进行了系统评价和荟萃分析,以确定临床样本中自我报告和认知灵活性的神经心理学测试之间的关系。
我们从成立到 2020 年 10 月搜索了 10 个数据库和相关灰色文献(例如,其他数据库和珍珠),并使用了系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目报告指南。符合入选标准的 11 篇文章包括 405 名参与者。
多层次随机效应荟萃分析显示,自我报告和认知灵活性的神经心理学测试之间没有关系(0.01,95%置信区间[-0.16 至 0.18])。对 12 对不同测试对的个体随机效应荟萃分析也没有发现关系。
根据我们的结果,很明显,认知灵活性的两种评估方法提供了独立的信息-它们不评估相同的结构。这些发现对未来的研究和临床实践具有重要意义-需要重新考虑自我报告和神经心理学测试“认知灵活性”的实际评估的结构,避免在临床样本中交替使用这些评估。(PsycInfo 数据库记录(c)2022 APA,保留所有权利)。