Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
criteria. While the Henry index was more robust, more than half (18/29) of the cases it identified as invalid were false positives. Differences in base rates between the original sample of Henry and the current one likely affected positive predictive power of the new index. Results suggest that this index is more useful to rule out invalid performance than to rule it in.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Donders et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: