Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-kwt9d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T07:20:14.790Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Neuropsychological Testing for Assessment of Treatment Effects: Methodologic Issues

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2014

William B. Barr
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Neuropsychological (NP) testing is now recognized as an important method for evaluating treatment effects. However, there are limitations to how these tests are currently used in most drug treatment protocols. Changes in cognition are typically defined in statistical terms, with little knowledge as to whether the observed differences are meaningful in any other sense. Methods for assessing changes in test scores need to account for test-retest reliability, practice effects, regression to the mean, and the impact of initial performance. All of these factors may vary according to the individual characteristics of the subject. This article reviews two methods from the NP literature that have attempted to account for these sources of test-retest bias. The reliable change index provides a confidence interval for predicted change by taking into account the test-retest reliability of the measure. Standardized regression-based measures use a more sophisticated statistical approach that enables them to better account for other potential sources of confound. Use of this methodology has been limited to studies of epilepsy surgery and sports-related concussion. These methods have the potential for enhancing the interpretation of NP test data in drug treatment protocols by providing an empirically based definition of clinically meaningful change.

Information

Type
Feature Article
Information
CNS Spectrums , Volume 7 , Issue 4 , April 2002, pp. 300 - 306
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

1.Franzen, MD. Reliability and Validity in Neuropsychological Assessment. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers; 2000.Google Scholar
2.Anastasi, A. Psychological Testing. New York, NY: MacMillan Publishing; 1968.Google Scholar
3.Dikmen, SS, Heaton, RK, Grant, I, et al.Test-retest reliability and practice effects of expanded Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Test Battery. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 1999;5:346–356.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Cohen, NJ, Squire, LR. Preserved learning and retention of pattern-analyzing skill in amnesia: dissociation of knowing how and knowing that. Science. 1980;210:207–210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Heaton, RK. Wisconsin Card Sorting Test. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources; 1981.Google Scholar
6.Hermann, BP, Wyler, AR, VanderZwagg, R, et al.Predictors of neuropsychological change following anterior temporal lobectomy: role of regression toward the mean. J Epilepsy. 1991;4:139–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Temkin, NR, Heaton, RK, Grant, I, et al.Detecting significant change in neuropsychological test performance: a comparison of four models. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 1999;5:357–369.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Chelune, GJ, Naugle, RI, Luders, H, et al.Individual change after epilepsy surgery: practice effects and base-rate information. Neuropsychology. 1993;7:41–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Hermann, BP, Seidenberg, M, Schoenfeld, J, et al.Empirical techniques for determining the reliability, magnitude, and pattern of neuropsychological change after epilepsy surgery. Epilepsia. 1996;37:942–950.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Sawrie, MS, Chelune, GJ, Naugle, RI, et al.Empirical methods for assessing meaningful change following epilepsy surgery. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 1996;2:556–564.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Jacobson, NS, Truax, P. Clinical significance:a statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1991;59:12–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Martin, RC, Sawrie, SM, Roth, DL, et al.Individual memory change after anterior temporal lobectomy: a base rate analysis using regression-based outcome methodology. Epilepsia. 1998;39:1075–1082.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Speer, DC. Clinically significant change: Jacobsen and Truax (1991) revisited. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1992;60:402–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Bruggemans, EF, Van deVijver, FJR, Huysmans, HA. Assessment of cognitive deterioration in individual patients following cardiac surgery: correcting for measurement error and practice effects. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1997;19:543–559.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.McSweeny, AJ, Naugle, RI, Chelune, GJ. T-scores for change: an illustration of a regression approach to depicting change in clinical neuropsychology. Clin Neuropsychol. 1993;7:300–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Rosenow, F, Luders, H. Presurgical evaluation of epilepsy. Brain. 2001;124:1683–1700.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Hermann, BP, Seidenberg, M, Haltiner, A, et al.Relationship of age of onset, chronologic age, and adequacy of preoperative performance to verbal memory change after anterior temporal lobectomy. Epilepsia. 1995;36:137–145.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18. Practice Parameter: the management of concussion in sports (summary statement). Report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee. Neurology. 1997;48:581–585.Google Scholar
19.Powell, JW, Barber-Foss, KD. Traumatic brain injury in high school athletes. JAMA. 1999;282:958–963.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20.Barth, JT, Alves, WM, Ryan, TV, et al.Mild head injury in sports: neuropsychological sequelae and recovery of function. In: Levin, HS, Eisenberg, HM, Benton, AL, eds. Mild Head Injury. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1989:257–275.Google Scholar
21.Lovell, MR, Collins, MW. Neuropsychological assessment of the college football player. J Head Trauma Rehab. 1998;13:9–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22.Macciocchi, SN. “Practice makes perfect:” retest effects in college athletes. J Clin Psychol. 1990;46:628–631.3.0.CO;2-V>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23.Hinton-Bayre, AD, Geffen, GM, Geffen, LB, et al.Concussion in contact sports: reliable change indices of impairment and recovery. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1999;21:70–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24.Barr, WB, McCrea, M. Sensitivity and specificity of standardized neurocognitive testing immediately following sports concussion. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2001;7:693–702.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25.Barr, WB. Neuropsychological testing of high school athletes: preliminary norms and test-retest indices. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. In press.Google Scholar
26.McCrea, M, Kelly, JP, Kluge, J, Ackley, B, Randolph, C. Standardized assessment of concussion in football players. Neurology. 1997;48:586–588.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed