Summary of all the videos, articles, and chapters that are needed for the quizzes. I got an 8.7 with my summary.
Consists of:
Quiz 1:
Lezak Ch. 5: The Neuropsychological Examination: Procedures. Pages: 135-137
Lezak Ch. 6: The Neuropsychological Examination: Interpretation. Pages: 164-178
L...
Quiz 1
Video’s
The description of test scores
How do we describe these test scores:
- Wide variety of standard scores
- To describe the scores, we need to know the mean and standard scores of all the scores
- IQ: mean 100, SD 15
- T score: mean 50, SD 10
- Scaled score: mean 10, SD 3
- Percentile of 60 ⇒ 60% of the population has the same score or lower
- 40% of the population has a higher score
Using the label impaired is not accepted anymore:
- A test score can be low for many reasons besides CNS dysfunction
- Preexisting cognitive limitations
- Low test engagement
- Examiner error
- Situational factors: pain, emotional distress, fatigue
- To determine if the person has cognitive impairments, the neuropsychologist has to interpret the
test scores to the unique patient’s history, and estimate premorbid level
,- Don’t label test score as abnormal, borderline, superior, deficient or impaired ⇒ give some kind of
interpretation
, - Use other labels:
- Extremely high
- Very high
- High average
- Average
- Low average
- Very low
- Extremely low
⇒ They only describe the performance, no interpretation
- Explain performance with descriptive labels ⇒ not the interpretation of score
Strategies for interpreting scores:
- Conservative
- Set a high cut-off to flag a test ⇒ e.g., 2SD below population mean or premorbid ability
level
- Increases specificity but decreases sensitivity ⇒ gives confidence that a lower score
gives true impairment
- Does give chance of missing subtle or mild impairment ⇒ increases false negatives (type
2)
- Liberal:
- Lower cut off to flag bad performance in a test, e.g., 1SD
- Increases sensitivity but decreases specificity ⇒ more sensitive to identify people with a
mild impairment
- Increases false positives (type 1)
- Select strategy based on setting and circumstance
- Select strategy based on:
- Assessment goals
- Conditions under consideration (diagnostic hypotheses)
- E.g., patient with memory problems ⇒ liberal approach to detect MCI/ dementia early
stage ; false negative means treatment delays
- We cannot have different cut offs for different patients within the same disorder
- Consequences of false positives and false negatives
- 1-1.5 SD does not necessarily mean impairment, is common
, How to interpret scores:
- Select strategy
- Perform pattern analysis ⇒ test scores should never be interpreted in isolation
- Integration ⇒ test scores, background, observation
IQ:
IQ above 130 = intellectual giftedness
- IQ cannot predict problems
- Composite scores:
- May obscure selective defects in specific tests
- Specific defects in certain cognitive processes (e.g., attention), would lead to low IQ
scores when other cognitive processes may be intact
- Loss of information: in which tests did the patient show problems?
⇒ Assessment focused on cognitive functions and not composite scores (like IQ)
There is not a unique score that can summarize the cognitive ability of a person
Deficit measurement:
- Current state of patient is compared to standard = comparison standard ⇒ if change has
occurred
- Two general comparative standards:
- Normative comparison standards; includes:
- Species-specific standards
- Species-wide capacities (e.g., normal reflexes)
- Counting change
- Drawing a recognizable person
- Using simple construction tools or cooking utensils
- Population average standards
- Average performance of large sample of individuals of a specific
cognitive or behavioral test
- Normative standard does not provide sufficient information to identify a deficit
within an individual; depends on premorbid functioning
- Individual comparison standards
- Determine if a specific patient score represents deficit or is normal
- Requires an individual’s premorbid level of ability
- Several ways:
- Historical records
- Direct method of deficit
- Requires the availability of premorbid test scores, school
grades
- Sometimes not available or difficult to obtain
- Psychometric methods
- Assess resistant cognitive functions to the effects of
brain dysfunction and aging
- E.g. vocabulary ⇒ correlates with education
- Shipley hartford vocabulary scale =
draw a line under the word with same
meaning (premorbid cognitive ability
assessment)
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper angeliqueswu. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €10,49. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
