Kane R L, Parsons O A, Goldstein G
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1985 Jun;7(3):211-23. doi: 10.1080/01688638508401254.
Ninety-two patients (46 brain-damaged and 46 control) were administered both the Halstead-Reitan and Luria-Nebraska Neuropsychological Batteries and the WAIS. The relationship between the Luria and the Halstead Battery was assessed using a common metric, T scores, and also by comparing impairment ratings for both batteries. Diagnostic screening accuracy was compared using discriminative functions and by computing the percentage of brain-damaged and control cases falling above and below the combined group medians. Results of the discriminative analyses were also compared with those obtained using only IQ scores from the WAIS. Findings support the comparability of the two neuropsychological test batteries with respect to diagnostic screening accuracy and the extent to which they measure level of impairment. Interestingly, equivalent discrimination between organic and control subjects was obtained using WAIS IQ scores. However, differences in the instruments did emerge on an individual case basis.
92名患者(46名脑损伤患者和46名对照者)接受了霍尔斯特德-雷坦神经心理成套测验、鲁利亚-内布拉斯加神经心理成套测验以及韦氏成人智力量表。使用共同的度量标准T分数评估鲁利亚成套测验和霍尔斯特德成套测验之间的关系,同时也通过比较两个成套测验的损伤评级来进行评估。使用判别函数并通过计算脑损伤患者和对照者中高于和低于合并组中位数的病例百分比来比较诊断筛查准确性。判别分析的结果也与仅使用韦氏成人智力量表智商分数获得的结果进行了比较。研究结果支持这两种神经心理测验成套工具在诊断筛查准确性以及它们测量损伤程度方面的可比性。有趣的是,使用韦氏成人智力量表智商分数在器质性病变受试者和对照受试者之间获得了同等的区分度。然而,在个别病例中确实出现了测验工具上的差异。