Noncredible Effort Research Articles

Neurocognitive and Symptom Validity Testing for Post-COVID-19 Condition in a Workers Compensation Context.

Efficacy of a neurocognitive screening evaluation (NCSE) in assessing symptoms and disability associated with post-COVID-19 condition (PCC) and facilitating employee recovery and return to work was evaluated. An NCSE was administered to 64 employees off work because of neurocognitive complaints attributed to post-COVID-19 condition. Neurocognitive and symptom validity data were analyzed along with recovery and return-to-work timelines. A large percentage of the employees gave invalid responses and noncredible effort on psychological and cognitive tests (48%). The NCSEs with invalid profiles suggested more severe cognitive and psychiatric symptoms than valid profiles. Both valid and invalid groups had significant reductions in illness duration and lost workdays after the NCSE. Post-COVID-19 condition resulted in reports of mild to moderate cognitive and psychiatric symptoms with extensive mean work leave of 11 months before mental health assessment. Regardless of symptom validity, after the NCSE, the employees were released to work at an average of 3 weeks.

Noncredible effort on the Nonverbal-Medical Symptom Validity Test (NV-MSVT): Impact on cognitive performance in pediatric mild traumatic brain injury

This study examined failure rates on the Nonverbal-Medical Symptom Validity Test (NV-MSVT) and its impact on cognitive performance in a sample of youths with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). Participants were 184 children and adolescents who presented to a multidisciplinary concussion clinic for a targeted neuropsychological evaluation. Performance Validity Tests (PVTs) were a part of the standard battery, including the NV-MSVT. Twenty-eight participants (15.2%) failed the NV-MSVT, none of whom displayed a genuine memory impairment profile (GMIP). Participants who failed the NV-MSVT performed significantly worse than those who passed the NV-MSVT on measures of IQ, memory, and immediate attention/working memory. There was no significant difference between groups on processing speed, sustained attention, cognitive flexibility, or sight word reading level. Aside from a slight difference in age, NV-MSVT failure was not impacted by demographic variables (sex, race), premorbid risk factors (pre-injury ADHD, learning disabilities, psychiatric diagnoses or treatment, developmental delays, or prior special education), injury-related variables (time since injury, positive neuroimaging findings, post-traumatic amnesia, number of prior mTBIs, etc.) or post-mTBI anxiety/depression. That said, participants who failed NV-MSVT endorsed significantly more severe postconcussive symptoms. These findings support the use of the NV-MSVT in neuropsychological evaluation of children and adolescents with mTBI.

Length of post-traumatic amnesia and its prediction of neuropsychological outcome following severe to extremely severe traumatic brain injury in a litigating sample

ABSTRACTPrimary Objective: The aim of the current study was to examine the relationship between duration of post-traumatic amnesia (PTA) and neuropsychological outcome at one or more years following severe to extremely severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) in a litigating sample.Research Design: Retrospective study design, using data collected from 2010 to 2017.Methods and Procedures: Data from 41 cases obtained from a private medicolegal neuropsychological database was examined. The database comprised information pertaining to TBI etiology, TBI severity parameters, demographic variables, neuropsychological test results and scores on psychological questionnaires. PTA duration was examined as a continuous variable. All cases that demonstrated non-credible effort were excluded.Main Outcomes and Results: Continuous PTA duration was not found to be a significant predictor of cognitive impairment across domains of verbal intellect, non-verbal intellect, working memory, information processing speed, immediate memory, delayed memory, and executive functioning.Conclusions: The predictive relationship between duration of PTA and cognitive impairment that has been reported in non-litigating populations did not exist in a litigating TBI sample. Findings illustrate the importance of investigating the relationships between injury variables and cognitive outcome in a population undergoing litigation, to provide better understanding of outcome in this subgroup of patients with TBI.

Performance and Symptom Validity-1Refining the Use of Likelihood Ratios for Determining Non-Credible Effort

Performance and Symptom Validity-1Refining the Use of Likelihood Ratios for Determining Non-Credible Effort

The impact of pediatric neuropsychological consultation in mild traumatic brain injury: a model for providing feedback after invalid performance

Objective: In recent years, pediatric practitioners have increasingly recognized the importance of objectively measuring performance validity during clinical assessments. Yet, no studies have examined the impact of neuropsychological consultation when invalid performance has been identified in pediatric populations and little published guidance exists for clinical management. Here we provide a conceptual model for providing feedback after noncredible performance has been detected. In a pilot study, we examine caregiver satisfaction and postconcussive symptoms following provision of this feedback for patients seen through our concussion program. Methods: Participants (N = 70) were 8–17-year-olds with a history of mild traumatic brain injury who underwent an abbreviated neuropsychological evaluation between 2 and 12 months post-injury. We examined postconcussive symptom reduction and caregiver satisfaction after neuropsychological evaluation between groups of patients who were determined to have provided noncredible effort (n = 9) and those for whom no validity concerns were present (n = 61). Results: We found similarly high levels of caregiver satisfaction between groups and greater reduction in self-reported symptoms after feedback was provided using the model with children with noncredible presentations compared to those with credible presentations. Conclusion: The current study lends preliminary support to the idea that the identification and communication of invalid performance can be a beneficial clinical intervention that promotes high levels of caregiver satisfaction and a reduction in self-reported and caregiver-reported symptoms.

Pediatric validity assessment.

Youth have been assumed historically to be less capable of deception than adults, even though acts of deception in childhood are not uncommon. Relatively little attention has focused on how frequently they feign or exaggerate during healthcare evaluations. The current article reviews the literature relevant to using validity tests in children and adolescents, as well as provides a case example of a young adolescent providing noncredible effort and exaggerated symptomatology during neuropsychological evaluation after a mild traumatic brain injury. Numerous case reports and case series have documented clearly that medical and neuropsychological noncredible presentations occur in children, likely more often than many practitioners believe. Thus far, research has found that the base rates of pediatric noncredible presentations are highest in children seen frequently by rehabilitation providers (i.e., children with persistent problems after mild traumatic brain injury and children from families seeking disability benefits on their behalf). Subjective clinical judgment is apt to be ineffective in consistently detecting noncredible presentations. Fortunately, recent research supports the use of several stand-alone validity tests in identifying noncredible pediatric data including the Test of Memory Malingering, Word Memory Test, and Medical Symptom Validity Test. If feigning and exaggeration are not considered in work-ups by rehabilitation practitioners, mismanagement and iatrogenic harm to the child can result.

C-92 * Detecting Malingered Cognitive Impairment with WAIS-IV Digit Span Variables in a Clinical Outpatient Setting

Objective: This project sought to examine the continued validity of Digit Span (DS) embedded measures as indicators of non-credible effort and further explore whether patterns of performance on the sequencing trial of the WAIS-IV DS subtest add incrementally to the established Reliable Digit Span (RDS) for assessing effort. Method: The litigant sample consisted of 98 archived outpatient neuropsychological evaluations that included a WAIS-IV protocol as part of assessment proceedings for traumatic brain injury, and a final clinical determination of the evaluator which did not utilize DS scores as part of the determination. Cases were divided into malingered neurocognitive dysfunction (MND) and non-malingering groups. ROC analysis was performed for standard RDS (DSF + DSB) as well as additional variants of Alternate RDS (DSF + DSS) and Enhanced RDS (DSF + DSB + DSS) proposed by Reese, Suhr, and Riddle (2012). Results: The AUC for standard RDS was observed to be .798 with a cut-score 6 producing sensitivity of 31.8% and specificity of 90.6%. The AUC for Alternate RDS was observed to be .836 with a cut-score of 8 producing sensitivity 72.7% and specificity of 81.1%. The AUC for Enhanced RDS was observed to be .854 with a cut-score of 10 producing sensitivity 45.5% and specificity of 88.7%. Conclusion(s): Results from this study indicate that DS variables, particularly Enhanced RDS, from the WAIS-IV continue to perform well as embedded measures of performance validity. Results from this study suggest further investigation of the Enhanced RDS measure to further establish validity for use in clinical practice.

The relationship between initial physical examination findings and failure on objective validity testing during neuropsychological evaluation after pediatric mild traumatic brain injury.

Background:The symptomatology after mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) is complex as symptoms are subjective and nonspecific. It is important to differentiate symptoms as neurologically based or caused by noninjury factors. Symptom exaggeration has been found to influence postinjury presentation, and objective validity tests are used to help differentiate these cases. This study examines how concussed patients seen for initial medical workup may present with noncredible effort during follow-up neuropsychological examination and identifies physical findings during evaluation that best predict noncredible performance.Hypothesis:A portion of pediatric patients will demonstrate noncredible effort during neuropsychological testing after mTBI, predicted by failure of certain vestibular and cognitive tests during initial examination.Study Design:Retrospective cohort.Level of Evidence:Level 4.Methods:Participants (n = 80) underwent evaluation by a sports medicine physician ≤3 months from injury, were subsequently seen for a neuropsychological examination, and completed the Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT). Variables included results of a mental status examination (orientation), serial 7s examination, Romberg test, and heel-to-toe walking test. The primary outcome variable of interest was pass/fail of the MSVT.Results:Of the participants, 51% were male and 49% were female. Eighteen of 80 (23%) failed the MSVT. Based on univariable logistic regression analysis, the outcomes of the Romberg test (P = 0.0037) and heel-to-toe walking test(P = 0.0066) were identified as significant independent predictors of MSVT failure. In a multivariable model, outcome of Romberg test was the only significant predictor of MSVT failure. The probability of MSVT failure was 66.7% (95% CI, 33.3% to 88.9%) when a subject failed the Romberg test.Conclusion:A meaningful percentage of pediatric subjects present evidence of noncredible performance during neuropsychological examination after mTBI. Initial examination findings in some cases may represent symptom exaggeration.

Are Verbal Intelligence Subtests and Reading Measures Immune to Non-Credible Effort?

The validity of neuropsychological testing is reliant on examinees putting forth adequate effort, yet it has been asserted that verbal subtests from the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales (WAIS) are insensitive to suboptimal effort in comparison to other commonly used neuropsychological measures. The current study examined performance differences on the entire WAIS-IV and WRAT-4 Reading, as well as the CVLT-II and several WMS-IV subtests, in 207 Veterans classified into Credible Effort (n = 146) and Non-credible Effort (n = 61) groups. Analyses revealed that the Non-credible Effort group performed significantly lower on all examined measures including verbal tests, with moderate to large effect sizes observed for most tests. Current findings thus indicate that WAIS-IV verbal subtests and reading ability measures, such as on the WRAT-4, are not insensitive to effects of non-credible effort. Consequently it is recommended that these tests not generally be used to estimate baseline intellectual functioning when found in the presence of non-credible effort. While there was broad performance suppression across all measures examined, results also showed a distinct continuum of test susceptibility with some measures being more or less sensitive to inadequate effort. Recommendations for future performance validity test development are presented.

The use of the Rey 15-Item Test and recognition trial to evaluate noncredible effort after pediatric mild traumatic brain injury

The Rey 15-Item Test (FIT) is a performance validity test commonly used in adult neuropsychological assessment. FIT classification statistics across studies have been variable, so a recognition trial was created to enhance the measure (Boone, K. B., Salazar, X., Lu, P., Warner-Chacon, K., & Razani, J. (2002). The Rey 15-Item recognition trial: A technique to enhance sensitivity of the Rey 15-Item Memorization Test. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 24(5), 561–573.). The current study assessed the utility of the FIT and recognition trial in a pediatric mild traumatic brain injury sample (N = 319, M = 14.57 years). All participants were administered the FIT and recognition trial as part of an abbreviated clinical neuropsychological evaluation. Failure on the Medical Symptom Validity Test was used as the criterion for noncredible effort. Fifteen percent of the sample met the criterion. The traditional adult cutoff score of <9 on the FIT recall trial yielded excellent specificity (98%), but very poor sensitivity (12%). When the recognition trial was utilized, a total score of <26 resulted in the best combined cutoff score (sensitivity = 55%, specificity = 91%). Results indicate that the FIT with recognition trial may be useful in the assessment of noncredible effort with children and adolescents, at least among relatively high-functioning populations.

Embedded Performance Validity Indicators Within the California Verbal Learning Test, Children’s Version

To date, few studies have examined the use of embedded performance validity indicators in pediatric populations. The present study examined the utility of variables within the California Verbal Learning Test, Children’s Version (CVLT-C) in detecting noncredible effort among a pediatric mild traumatic brain injury sample. The sample consisted of 411 clinically referred patients aged 8–16 years. A total of 13% of the participants failed both the Medical Symptom Validity Test and at least one other performance validity measure. No demographic or injury-related variables differentiated the noncredible and adequate effort groups. The noncredible group performed significantly worse than the adequate effort group across a majority of CVLT-C variables. Logistic regression analysis revealed that the Recognition Discriminability (RD) score was the most robust in predicting noncredible effort. Among this relatively high-functioning sample, an RD cutoff z-score of –0.5 resulted in sensitivity of 55% and specificity of 91%. A more conservative RD cutoff z-score of –1.0 resulted in sensitivity of 41% and specificity of 97%. These findings are comparable to the classification statistics found for many embedded indicators in the adult literature. Although only moderately sensitive, the RD score on the CVLT-C appears to have good utility in identifying noncredible effort in a relatively high-functioning pediatric mTBI population.

Feigning a Severe Impairment Profile

The main goal of a severe impairment profile (SIP) on a performance validity test (PVT) is to help reduce the false-positive rate when identifying non-credible effort in people who are truly impaired. A secondary goal is to help with clinical judgment about impairment itself. Although there is adequate specificity for the SIP in severely impaired individuals, a large proportion of simulators can produce an SIP. Given that Social Security Disability (SSD) claimants are typically low functioning and also seeking compensation, it was of interest to know whether the SIP can be used to exclude truly low-functioning claimants, or whether SSD claimants identified as malingering also produce the SIP, as the simulators in a recent study of this profile. By comparing the SSD claimants to a group of low-functioning Child Protection (CP) claimants who were motivated to do well in order to get their children returned from State custody, the findings clearly show that the SIP is easily produced in criterion-malingerers, but not in those low-functioning CP claimants motivated to do well.

The implications of symptom validity test failure for ability-based test performance in a pediatric sample.

If an examinee exerts inadequate effort to perform well during a psychological or neuropsychological exam, the resulting data will represent an inaccurate representation of the individual's true abilities and difficulties. In adult populations, methodologies to identify noncredible effort have grown exponentially in the last 2 decades. Though a comparatively modest amount of work has focused on tools to identify noncredible effort in pediatric populations, recent research has demonstrated that children can consistently pass several stand-alone symptom validity tests (SVTs) using cutoffs established with adults. However, no identified studies have examined the implications of pediatric SVT failure for ability-based test performance. The current sample consisted of 276 children aged 8-16 years referred consecutively for outpatient clinical neuropsychological consultation following mild traumatic brain injury (TBI). An earlier subgroup of this same case series that also included 17-year-olds was presented in Kirkwood and Kirk (2010). Nineteen percent of the current sample performed below the actuarial cutoff on the Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT). No background or injury-related variable differentiated those who passed from those who failed the MSVT. Performance on the MSVT was correlated significantly with performance on all ability-based tests and explained 38% of the total ability-based test variance. Participants failing the MSVT performed significantly worse on nearly all neuropsychological tests, with large effect sizes apparent across most tests. The results provide compelling evidence that practitioners should add objective SVTs to the evaluation of school-aged youth, even when secondary gain issues might not be readily apparent and particularly following mild TBI.

The Value of the WISC-IV Digit Span Subtest in Detecting Noncredible Performance during Pediatric Neuropsychological Examinations

In adult populations, research on methodologies to identify negative response bias has grown exponentially in the last two decades. Far less work has focused on methods appropriate for children. Although several recent studies have demonstrated the appropriateness of using stand-alone symptom validity tests with younger populations, a near absence of pediatric work has investigated embedded validity indicators. The present study examined the classification value of several scores derived from the WISC-IV Digit Span subtest. The sample consisted of 274 clinically referred mild traumatic brain injury patients aged 8 through 16 years. Fourteen percent of the participants failed both the Medical Symptom Validity Test and Test of Memory Malingering, which was used as the criterion for noncredible effort. For age-corrected scaled scores, a score of ≤5 resulted in the optimal cut-score, yielding sensitivity of 51% and specificity of 96%. For Reliable Digit Span, the optimal cut-score was ≤6, with sensitivity of 51% and specificity of 92%. Although only moderately sensitive, Digit Span scores are likely to have good utility in identifying noncredible performance in relatively high-functioning older children and adolescents. Indeed, classification statistics produced in this pediatric sample compare favorably with those produced in many real-world adult patients.

Noncredible Effort during Pediatric Neuropsychological Exam: A Case Series and Literature Review

Neuropsychological test interpretation rests upon the assumption that the examinee has exerted full effort. If an individual provides inadequate effort during exam, the resulting data will be invalid and represent an underestimate of the person's true abilities. Although youth have been assumed historically to be less capable of deception than adults, acts of deception in childhood are not uncommon, even in normative populations. Yet, very few cases of children who have provided suboptimal effort during neuropsychological exam have appeared in the scientific literature. We present six clinical cases illustrating that children down to at least age 8 years can present with noncredible performance. The cases include those in which clear external incentives could be identified to those in which intrinsic or psychological factors were presumed to predominate. The fairly diverse nature of the presented cases, along with other recent work, suggests that suboptimal effort in children is apt to occur more frequently than previously recognized, even if it might occur less often than in comparable adult samples. In most of the presented cases, noncredible performance would not have been detected definitively by clinical judgment alone, reinforcing the value of routinely incorporating symptom validity tests into the neuropsychological assessment of school-aged children. The number of effort tests that have demonstrated utility in children pales in comparison to those available to the adult practitioner, although recent research now supports the use of several standalone measures with pediatric patients.

Failure to Inhibit the Reading Response on the Stroop Test: A Pathognomonic Indicator of Suspect Effort

We present 6 patients who displayed noncredible effort on neuropsychological testing (verified by failures on specialized measures designed to discreetly assess effort status and multiple behavioral inconsistencies) and complained of complete illiteracy secondary to impoverished educational history, learning disability, or acquired brain injury. The Stroop Test, a measure of a specific aspect of executive function requiring inhibition of an automatized oral reading response in favor of a less habitual, competing color-naming response, was administered to these patients. All six subjects claimed that they were unable to perform the Word-Reading trial as a consequence of total reading disability, but on the Color-Word Interference trial, they all committed “errors” by reading the written words. Five of the six subjects also performed substantially slower on the Interference condition relative to the Color-Naming trial, indicating that they were in fact inhibiting a reading response. However, in cases involving complaints of complete reading illiteracy, the observation of these individuals performing an act that they claimed to be unable to do was the most powerful and pathognomonic indicator of deliberate feigning or exaggeration of impairment in these cases.

Effectiveness of the Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test and the Meyers and Meyers Recognition Trial in the Detection of Suspect Effort

The Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test (ROCFT) is a popular measure of visuoconstructive skills and visual memory. A recognition memory trial was recently developed by Meyers and Meyers (1995) and attached to the standard administration of the ROCFT. The addition of this recognition paradigm (comprised of 12 small designs from the original ROCFT stimulus interspersed among 12 foils) makes ROCFT a potentially useful instrument in capturing suspect effort because patients attempting to feign memory difficulties typically operate from the misconception that recognition memory is as impaired as free recall in brain injury and, as a result, suppress recognition performance. The ROCFT (copy, immediate recall [i.e., 3-min recall], and the recognition trial) was administered to four sets of participants: 58 patients with suspect effort; 23 neuropsychology clinic patients with verbal memory impairment, 17 clinic patients with visual memory impairment, and 30 clinic patients without memory impairment. Group comparisons revealed significant group differences in direct copy, immediate recall, and recognition scores of the ROCFT (p <.0001), with the suspect effort group displaying significantly lower performance on the copy and immediate recall scores than the verbal memory impaired and nonmemory impaired clinic patient groups, and significantly lower recognition scores than all three clinical groups. Furthermore, qualitative examination of the recognition trial revealed the presence of “atypical recognition errors” that were endorsed with significantly higher frequency by the suspect effort patients. A combination score incorporating the copy, true positive recognition, and atypical recognition error scores yielded a sensitivity of 74% while misclassifying only approximately 4% of verbal memory impaired clinic patients, 12% of visual memory impaired clinic patients, and 3% of nonmemory impaired clinic patients. Thus, the ROCFT + recognition trial show considerable potential for detecting noncredible effort.