Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
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.
Donders et al. (Mon,) studied this question.