Abstract
Objective: Researchers and practitioners can detect cognitive improvement or decline within a single examinee by applying a reliable change methodology. This study examined reliable change through test-retest data from the English-language National Institutes of Health Toolbox Cognition Battery (NIHTB-CB) normative sample. Method: Participants included adults (n = 138; age: M ± SD = 54.8 ± 20.0, range: 18-85; 51.4% men; 68.1% White) who completed test-retest assessments about a week apart on five fluid cognition tests, providing raw scores, age-adjusted standard scores (SS), and demographic-adjusted T-scores (T). Results: The Fluid Cognition Composite (SS: ICC = 0.87; T-score: ICC = 0.84) and the five fluid cognition tests had good test-retest reliability (SS: ICC range = 0.66-0.85; T-score: ICC range = 0.64-0.86). The lower and upper bounds of 70%, 80%, and 90% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated around change scores, which serve as cutoffs for determining reliable change. Using T-scores, 90% CI, and adjustment for practice effects, 32.3% declined on one or more tests, 9.7% declined on two or more tests, 36.6% improved on one or more tests, and 5.4% improved on two or more tests. Conclusions: It was common for participants to show reliable change on at least one test score, but not two or more test scores. Per an 80% CI, test-retest difference scores beyond these cutoffs would indicate reliable change: Dimensional Change Card Sort (SS ≥ 14/T ≥ 10), Flanker (SS ≥ 12/T ≥ 8), List Sorting (SS ≥ 14/T ≥ 10), Picture Sequence Memory (SS ≥ 19/T ≥ 13), Pattern Comparison (SS ≥ 11/T ≥ 8), and Fluid Cognition Composite (SS ≥ 10/T ≥ 7). The reliable change cutoffs could be applied in research or practice to detect within-person change in fluid cognition at the individual level.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 702-713 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology |
| Volume | 39 |
| Issue number | 6 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Sep 1 2024 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.
Funding
This work was supported, in part, by a Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health (BIRCWH) grant (#K12-DA035150) from the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). G.L.I., Ph.D. serves as a scientific advisor for NanoDX®, Sway Operations, LLC, and Highmark, Inc. He has received past research support or funding from several test publishing companies, including ImPACT Applications, Inc., CNS Vital Signs, and Psychological Assessment Resources (PAR, Inc.). He receives royalties from the sales of one neuropsychological test (WCST-64). He acknowledges unrestricted philanthropic support from ImPACT Applications, Inc., the Mooney-Reed Charitable Foundation, the National Rugby League, Boston Bolts, and the Schoen Adams Research Institute at Spaulding Rehabilitation.
| Funders | Funder number |
|---|---|
| Schoen Adams Research Institute | |
| National Institutes of Health (NIH) | |
| National Institute on Drug Abuse | |
| Mooney-Reed Charitable Foundation | |
| Psychological Assessment Resources | |
| Highmark, Inc. | |
| ImPACT Applications, Inc. | |
| Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health (BIRCWH) | #K12-DA035150 |
| PAR, Inc. | WCST-64 |
Keywords
- Cognition
- Neuropsychological tests
- Psychometrics
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
- Clinical Psychology
- Psychiatry and Mental health