• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

information for practice

news, new scholarship & more from around the world


advanced search
  • gary.holden@nyu.edu
  • @ Info4Practice
  • Archive
  • About
  • Help
  • Browse Key Journals
  • RSS Feeds

That old dog can still hunt—Alternative cutoffs and the recognition trial improve the classification accuracy of the Rey 15-Item Test.

Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, Vol 55(5), Oct 2024, 426-435; doi:10.1037/pro0000557

This study was designed to test the upper limits of the Rey-15’s classification accuracy in cognitively intact university students and clinical patients. A brief battery of neuropsychological tests was administered to all participants. Students were randomly assigned to either the control (n = 80) or experimental malingering (n = 59) condition. Invalid performance in patients (n = 52) was psychometrically defined. The classification accuracy of the Rey-15 (original free recall and the combination score including the recognition trial developed by Boone et al., 2002) was computed across a range of cutoffs. A free recall ≤ 13 and combination score ≤ 25 produced a good combination of sensitivity (.41–.70) and specificity (.90–.94) among students. The highest cutoff to reach .90 specificity in clinical patients was free recall ≤ 11 and combination score ≤ 23, at .38–.56 sensitivity. Results confirmed the previous reports that more liberal alternative cutoffs maintain adequate specificity. Cutoffs can be raised even further in cognitively intact examinees. The introduction of the recognition trial provided a significant boost to the instrument’s classification accuracy. The Rey-15 remains a cost-effective and clinically useful test in both clinical and research settings. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)

Read the full article ›

Posted in: Journal Article Abstracts on 10/28/2024 | Link to this post on IFP |
Share

Primary Sidebar

Categories

Category RSS Feeds

  • Calls & Consultations
  • Clinical Trials
  • Funding
  • Grey Literature
  • Guidelines Plus
  • History
  • Infographics
  • Journal Article Abstracts
  • Meta-analyses - Systematic Reviews
  • Monographs & Edited Collections
  • News
  • Open Access Journal Articles
  • Podcasts
  • Video

© 1993-2025 Dr. Gary Holden. All rights reserved.

gary.holden@nyu.edu
@Info4Practice