Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Computerized screening measures can provide valuable information on cognition. However, determining the validity of obtained data is critical for interpretation. The purpose of this study was to examine the embedded validity indicators on the CNS Vital Signs battery in a sample of youth with neurological diagnoses. The sample included 275 children and adolescents (mean = 13.9, SD = 3.0) with neurological disorders. Six out of seven subtests and six of the nine domain scores on CNS Vital Signs had fewer than 5% of the sample flagged as invalid on the embedded indicators. However, the Shifting Attention Test and its derived domain scores had higher rates of being flagged. Patients with one or more flagged scores (18% of sample) were younger and had lower intellectual abilities, psychomotor speed, verbal memory, and performance on other validity tests. Compared to stand-alone validity tests, CNS Vital Signs embedded validity indicators had low sensitivity. More research is needed with the embedded indicators in youth.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brooks et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: