Re-evaluation of psychometric evidence and update of normative data for the Test of Practical Judgment

Abstract

Objective The Test of Practical Judgment (TOP-J) has shown utility in inpatient and outpatient settings in older adults who present with mild cognitive impairment and various dementia subtypes. The TOP-J has two versions (i.e. 9 items and 15 items), and was initially validated within a small rural non-Hispanic White sample. In the current study, we re-evaluated the psychometric evidence and refined scoring criteria and administration guidelines in older adults with more diverse demographic characteristics than the original validation sample. Method: Participants (N = 348) were recruited from several boroughs of New York City and surrounding areas (mean/median age = 79; mean years education = 15, median = 15.5; 68% female; 30% Black/African-American, 8% Hispanic). Results: Reliability and validity were comparable to original findings. Based on confirmatory factor analysis, one item was replaced on the 9-item version, now called TOP-J Form A. Normative data for cognitively intact participants (n = 261) were updated and stratified by two education groups. Conclusions: The TOP-J is increasingly used in clinical and research settings in the U.S. and abroad, and the current study provides improved normative data and administration and scoring guidelines for use with demographically diverse older individuals.