PSY FPX 7610 Assessment 2 Evaluation of Technical Quality

Student Name

Capella University

PSY FPX 7610 Tests and Measurements

Prof. Name:

Date

Introduction

Clinical neuropsychologists can assess various domains to make accurate diagnoses of cognitive impairments. It is essential for cognitive measurement tools to yield precise results (Rae-Grant & Parsons, 2014). The psychometric characteristics of these tools are critical in determining their suitability for specific purposes. Each neuropsychological battery undergoes validity testing to ensure that the tests measure what they are intended to measure. Additionally, reliability testing is conducted, comparing each test with others to confirm that the results are accurate, precise, and replicable when necessary (Cohen et al., 2022).

Several batteries are utilized by clinical neuropsychologists to assess cognition. They often employ complete batteries alongside supplementary tests to address the specific concerns of patients. Three commonly administered assessments are the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS), the Neuropsychological Assessment Battery (NAB), and the Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Battery (HRNB). These tests evaluate cognition across multiple domains, and clinical neuropsychologists frequently use them to determine the cognitive level presented by a patient.

PSY FPX 7610 Assessment 2 Evaluation of Technical Quality

The RBANS consists of 12 subtests that assess immediate and delayed memory, visuospatial skills, language, and attention. This assessment is suitable for individuals aged 12 to 89 years (Randolph, 2012). The NAB includes 36 tests divided into six modules, measuring attention, language, spatial skills, memory, and executive function in adults aged 18 to 97 years. The NAB is distinctive due to its flexible administration and includes a screening module to ascertain whether further testing in a specific domain is warranted (Stern & White, 2003).

The HRNB comprises a series of tests that evaluate physical brain function and assess the impact of brain damage or injury. This battery includes ten tests that measure motor function, language, auditory processing, attention, executive function, and visuospatial abilities. Initially developed for individuals aged 14 to 50 years, the test has since been revised to include individuals up to 85 years of age. This paper will analyze the validity and reliability of these three batteries to determine their adequacy in evaluating adults aged 50 and older with various types of cognitive impairments.

Technical Review Article Summaries for the RBANS

McKay, C., Casey, J. E., Wertheimer, J., & Fictenberg, N. L. (2007). Reliability and validity of the RBANS in a traumatic brain injured sample. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 22(1), 91–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acn.2006.11.003

The study conducted by McKay et al. (2007) examined the validity of the RBANS in patients with moderate to severe traumatic brain injuries (TBI). The battery generates index scores that are comparable to scores from tests targeting specific domains, demonstrating the effectiveness of the RBANS as a comprehensive assessment tool. These scores enable clinical neuropsychologists to save time by administering this test, which provides scores across multiple cognitive domains and aids in diagnosing various neurological disorders. While there is ample research supporting the comparability of index scores, there is a noted lack of research regarding individual test scores. The researchers hypothesized that the index scores would exhibit strong reliability, with the exception of language and attention scores, and that the subtests would yield valid scores comparable to other neuropsychological tests assessing the same domains.

The study involved 57 adults aged 20 years and older with brain injuries. The researchers administered the RBANS to participants and compared the results to normative data from other neuropsychological tests. Findings indicated that the RBANS Total Scale score demonstrated internal consistency for adults with TBIs (.83). The results supported the researchers’ first hypothesis, revealing that language and attention scores exhibited weaker reliability among the subtests. Additionally, the data supported the second hypothesis, as each subtest produced scores comparable to other neuropsychological tests measuring the same domains. Overall, the results indicated that the RBANS possesses strong convergent validity as a screening tool, particularly for adults with TBIs.

PSY FPX 7610 Assessment 2 Evaluation of Technical Quality

Gontkovsky, S. T., Beatty, W. W., & Mold, J. W. (2004). Repeatable battery for the assessment of neuropsychological status in a normal, geriatric sample. Clinical Gerontologist, 27(3).

Gontkovsky et al. (2004) examined the psychometric properties and reliability of the RBANS. Many older adults tend to experience fatigue when engaging with longer assessment batteries, making the RBANS particularly suitable for this population. The test duration is approximately 30 minutes and provides comprehensive scores across five cognitive domains. Other shorter assessments may fail to identify certain types of impairments, such as dementia. The researchers aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of the RBANS within a healthy geriatric sample. The study involved 631 participants aged 64 to 94 years, with testing conducted in the primary care offices of the participants by trained research nurses.

The findings revealed that the Cronbach’s alpha for the domain and total scores was .86. Intercorrelation coefficients varied from .25 to .79, accounting for 26% of the variance. The reliability of the RBANS was confirmed to be internally consistent. Each test score correlated with the index scores of the respective domains as well as the overall score. These results align with those of other researchers who have analyzed the RBANS, indicating that the test possesses convergent validity.

Technical Review Article Summaries for the NAB

Donders, J., & Levitt, T. (2012). Criterion validity of the neuropsychological assessment battery after traumatic brain injury. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 27(4), 440–445. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acs043

Donders and Levitt (2012) conducted a study to assess the criterion validity of the NAB. While there is extensive research on the NAB and cognitive disorders, there is limited investigation into its validity for individuals with traumatic brain injuries (TBI). The researchers aimed to evaluate the sensitivity of the domains to TBI. They referenced prior studies on TBI and established that for the NAB to yield valid scores, the mean performance of individuals with TBI should be significantly lower compared to healthy individuals of similar demographics, exhibit a moderate effect size, and show statistically significant negative correlations with the duration of coma. The NAB was administered to 54 participants aged 18 years and older with a TBI. The results indicated that the mean performance of individuals with TBI was F(3,104) = 14.16, p < .001.

References

Cohen, J. A., Rudick, R. A., & Fisher, E. (2022). The neuropsychological batteries for cognitive assessment. In J. A. Cohen (Ed.), Neuropsychology: Theory, Assessment, and Treatment (2nd ed., pp. 187-215). Springer.

Gontkovsky, S. T., Beatty, W. W., & Mold, J. W. (2004). Repeatable battery for the assessment of neuropsychological status in a normal, geriatric sample. Clinical Gerontologist, 27(3).