Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-99c86f546-swqlm Total loading time: 0.173 Render date: 2021-12-04T14:09:08.489Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Detecting significant change in neuropsychological test performance: A comparison of four models

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 1999

NANCY R. TEMKIN
Affiliation:
Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
ROBERT K. HEATON
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA
IGOR GRANT
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA VA San Diego Healthcare System, San Diego, CA
SUREYYA S. DIKMEN
Affiliation:
Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA

Abstract

A major use of neuropsychological assessment is to measure changes in functioning over time; that is, to determine whether a difference in test performance indicates a real change in the individual or just chance variation. Using 7 illustrative test measures and retest data from 384 neurologically stable adults, this paper compares different methods of predicting retest scores, and of determining whether observed changes in performance are unusual. The methods include the Reliable Change Index, with and without correction for practice effect, and models based upon simple and multiple regression. For all test variables, the most powerful predictor of follow-up performance was initial performance. Adding demographic variables and overall neuropsychological competence at baseline significantly but slightly improved prediction of all follow-up scores. The simple Reliable Change Index without correction for practice performed least well, with high error rates and large prediction intervals (confidence intervals). Overall prediction accuracy was similar for the other three methods; however, different models produce large differences in predicted scores for some individuals, especially those with extremes of initial test performance, overall competency, or demographics. All 5 measures from the Halstead–Reitan Battery had residual (observed − predicted score) variability that increased with poorer initial performance. Two variables showed significant nonnormality in the distribution of residuals. For accurate prediction with smallest prediction–confidence intervals, we recommend multiple regression models with attention to differential variability and nonnormality of residuals. (JINS, 1999, 5, 357–369.)

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 1999 The International Neuropsychological Society

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.)
202
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Detecting significant change in neuropsychological test performance: A comparison of four models
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Detecting significant change in neuropsychological test performance: A comparison of four models
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Detecting significant change in neuropsychological test performance: A comparison of four models
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *