Abstract
Recent years have witnessed an explosion in the amount of research literature dedicated to the identification of symptom exaggeration and/or malingering in neuropsychological assessments. Additionally, there is now a growing literature devoted to estimating the base rates of symptom exaggeration/malingering in a range of populations and settings. However, very little literature has been devoted to estimating the positive predictive value (PPV) or negative predictive value (NPV) of these assessment devices and/or strategies. The current project was conducted to provide an illustrative example of how to use the research literature to calculate both PPV and NPV in everyday clinical practice. When the Word Memory Test (WMT) was used as the "gold standard" to which the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) was compared, the TOMM achieved very high PPV (.98) and acceptable NPV (.78). How to incorporate the strategy used into clinical practice is discussed.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 533-540 |
| Number of pages | 8 |
| Journal | Clinical Neuropsychologist |
| Volume | 20 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 1 Sep 2006 |
Fingerprint
Cite this
}
Estimating the predictive value of the Test of Memory Malingering : An illustrative example for clinicians. / O'Bryant, Sidney; Lucas, John A.
In: Clinical Neuropsychologist, Vol. 20, No. 3, 01.09.2006, p. 533-540.Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article
TY - JOUR
T1 - Estimating the predictive value of the Test of Memory Malingering
T2 - An illustrative example for clinicians
AU - O'Bryant, Sidney
AU - Lucas, John A.
PY - 2006/9/1
Y1 - 2006/9/1
N2 - Recent years have witnessed an explosion in the amount of research literature dedicated to the identification of symptom exaggeration and/or malingering in neuropsychological assessments. Additionally, there is now a growing literature devoted to estimating the base rates of symptom exaggeration/malingering in a range of populations and settings. However, very little literature has been devoted to estimating the positive predictive value (PPV) or negative predictive value (NPV) of these assessment devices and/or strategies. The current project was conducted to provide an illustrative example of how to use the research literature to calculate both PPV and NPV in everyday clinical practice. When the Word Memory Test (WMT) was used as the "gold standard" to which the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) was compared, the TOMM achieved very high PPV (.98) and acceptable NPV (.78). How to incorporate the strategy used into clinical practice is discussed.
AB - Recent years have witnessed an explosion in the amount of research literature dedicated to the identification of symptom exaggeration and/or malingering in neuropsychological assessments. Additionally, there is now a growing literature devoted to estimating the base rates of symptom exaggeration/malingering in a range of populations and settings. However, very little literature has been devoted to estimating the positive predictive value (PPV) or negative predictive value (NPV) of these assessment devices and/or strategies. The current project was conducted to provide an illustrative example of how to use the research literature to calculate both PPV and NPV in everyday clinical practice. When the Word Memory Test (WMT) was used as the "gold standard" to which the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) was compared, the TOMM achieved very high PPV (.98) and acceptable NPV (.78). How to incorporate the strategy used into clinical practice is discussed.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33747088163&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/13854040590967568
DO - 10.1080/13854040590967568
M3 - Review article
C2 - 16895864
AN - SCOPUS:33747088163
VL - 20
SP - 533
EP - 540
JO - Clinical Neuropsychologist
JF - Clinical Neuropsychologist
SN - 1385-4046
IS - 3
ER -