Upload
hoanghuong
View
231
Download
7
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
9/1/2016
1
Understanding Psychological Evaluation Reports
Elizabeth Begyn, Ph.D., HSPP, ABPP-CN
Alexandra Quast, Psy.D.
Review of Presentation
• Review of test development and administration • Different types of evaluations • Common instruments used in psychological evaluations • Bell curve and brief statistics review • How evaluations can be useful
– How test scores relate to functional deficits • E.g. mild intellectual disability
• Limitations of these measures • Case examples • What helps individuals to be successful despite areas of weakness? • Success includes more than intelligence • Resources
9/1/2016
2
Psychological Tests and Measurement
• It is important for clinicians to use well developed tests. Key components to a “good” test include: – Diverse and Representative Normative Sample – Measurement error – Strong reliability – Good validity
• Appropriate selection of measures, well-informed interpretation of scores
• Standardized administration • Note: it is fairly common for healthy individuals to
show isolated weaknesses in one test or area. Slick (2006)
Psychological Tests and Measurement
• Professionals who administer and interpret psychological measures include graduate education and training in many areas, including (but not inclusive) – Psychometric and measurement knowledge – Statistics and measurement error – Selection of appropriate tests – Test administration procedures – Ethnic, racial, cultural, gender, age, and linguistic variables
• Published guidelines from the American Psychological Association (APA) can be found online at http://www.apa.org/science/programs/testing/qualifications.pdf
9/1/2016
3
Different Types of Evaluations Psychological Evaluations
Psycho-educational Evaluations
Neuropsychological Evaluations
Reason to Refer Concern about psychological functioning (e.g. emotional or behavioral functioning)
Concern about overall cognitive functioning or academic deficits. More often used without history of medical or neurological conditions
Concerns about cognitive skills. More often have history of medical or neurological condition
Who conducts them
In outpatient settings, overseen by psychologist. In school settings, typically performed by master’s level school psychologists
In outpatient settings, overseen by psychologist. In school settings, typically performed by master’s level school psychologists
Neuropsychologist (psychologist who completed 2-year fellowship in neuropsychology)
Different Types of Evaluations
Psychological Evaluations
Psycho-educational Evaluations
Neuropsychological Evaluations
Types of measures given
Cognitive ability (IQ test); personality and emotional functioning. May include measures of academic skills, behavior, and adaptive functioning
Cognitive ability (IQ test) and academic skills. May include personality/emotional adjustment and/or behavior.
Measures typically administered in other evaluations plus: learning and memory, executive functioning, motor and sensorimotor, visual perceptual skills, attention, language processing, and social perception.
9/1/2016
4
Common Instruments Used
• Intelligence – Wechsler scales
• Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV) • Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fifth Edition (WISC-V)
– Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales-Fifth Edition (SB5) – Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities-Fourth
Edition (WJ-IV Cog)
• Achievement – WJ Tests of Achievement-Fourth Edition (WJ-IV, Ach) – Wide Range Achievement Test-Fourth Edition (WRAT-4) – Wechsler Individual Achievement Test-Third Edition (WIAT-
III)
Common Instruments Used
• Mood and Behavior – Beck Depression Inventory-Second Edition (BDI-II) – Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) – Behavior Assessment System for Children-Third
Edition (BASC-3, norms available through age 21) – Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Adult
Version (BRIEF-A)
• Personality – Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Second
Edition (MMPI-2) – Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI)
9/1/2016
5
Common Instruments Used
• Adaptive Functioning – Adaptive Behavior Assessment System-Second
Edition (ABAS-II)
– Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales-Second Edition (VABS-II)
• Symptom and Performance validity – Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM)
– Word Memory Test (WMT)
– Embedded measures
Sample Statistics Standard Score Scaled Score T-Score Percentile Rank
Mean (M) and
Standard Deviation
(SD)
M = 100, SD =15 M = 10, SD = 3 M = 50, SD =
10
-
CLASSIFICATION
Very Superior 130 and above 16 and above 70 and above 98th and above
Superior 120-129 13-14 64 to 69 92nd – 97th
High Average 110-119 12-13 58-63 77th – 91st
Average 90-109 8-11 43-57 25th -75th
Low Average 80-89 6-7 37-42 9th – 23rd
Below
Average/Borderline
70-79 4-5 30-35 3rd – 8th
Extremely Low Below 70 3 and below 29 and below 2nd and below
9/1/2016
6
Bell Curve
Factors other than ability that may influence testing performance
• Physical variables (e.g. pain, sleep/fatigue)
• Psychological variables (e.g. depression and anxiety)
• Psychosocial variables
• Motivation
9/1/2016
7
How psychological evaluations can be useful
• Identify factors that impact vocational goals and employability – Cognitive factors
• Language deficits • Slow processing speed • Inattention • Executive dysfunction • Impaired fine motor skills • Learning disability
– Psychiatric Factors • Depression • Anxiety • Behavioral dysregulation
How psychological evaluations can be useful
• Identify factors that impact vocational goals and employability
– Adaptive Functioning • Similar cognitive profiles may be functioning very differently
in daily life
– Motivation • Seek help from others
• Strong work ethic
• Approach to evaluation
9/1/2016
8
How psychological evaluations can be useful
• Test scores help identify functional deficits
– Several studies support that neurocognitive factors are related to functioning in daily life:
• Intellectual abilities, visual memory, verbal learning, cognitive flexibility, and behavioral ratings of attention span and frustration tolerance were associated with successful completion of instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) tasks (e.g., taking medication, managing money) in individuals in a post-acute brain injury rehabilitation program (Farmer & Eakman, 1995)
How psychological evaluations can be useful
– Several studies support that neurocognitive factors are related to functioning in daily life:
• Measures of executive functioning may predict academic achievement and behavior in the workplace (i.e., number of hours worked, number of promotions received) (Ready, Steirman, & Paulsen, 2001)
• Measures of executive functioning were stronger predictors of IADLs than other neuropsychological measures, mood factors, or demographic factors (Cahn-
Weiner et al., 2000)
9/1/2016
9
Example of utility of psychological evaluations
• Intellectual Disability – Onset during the developmental period – A. Deficits in intellectual functions, confirmed by
clinical assessment and individualized, standardized testing
– B. Deficits in adaptive functioning – C. Onset during the developmental period
• Specify current severity (Mild, Moderate, Severe, Profound)
• Defined on the basis of adaptive functioning because it determines the level of supports required
DSM-V Mild Intellectual Disability Conceptual Domain Social Domain Practical Domain
• Problems learning academic skills in school-aged individuals
• Weaknesses in abstract thinking • Concrete approach
to problem solving • Executive Functioning
deficits • E.g., planning,
approach to tasks, flexibility
• Poor functional academic skills • E.g., problems
managing finances
• Immature in social interactions
• Problems accurately perceiving social cues
• Concrete or immature language/conversation
• Problems regulating emotions/behaviors in social situations
• Limited understanding of risks in social situations • Poor judgment • Risk of being
manipulated
• Personal care may be age-appropriate
• Need more support in complex daily living tasks • E.g., grocery
shopping, transportation, managing finances
• May require support to make health and legal decisions
• Typically need support in skilled vocation • Less likely to do
well in a job that requires conceptual skills Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders- Fifth
Edition (DSM-V)
9/1/2016
10
Limitations of test measures
• Samples not always representative of patient population referred for neuropsychological evaluation
• Significant but moderate correlations. Neurocognitive factors account for 20-50% of variance in measures of everyday ability
• Many studies rely on collateral reports of functioning
• Confounding factors – Multiple aspects must be considered (e.g., emotional
functioning, motor problems, physical health)
– Individual has good compensatory strategies
Chaytor & Schmitter-Edgecombe, 2003 Ready, Steirman, & Paulsen, 2001
Spooner & Pachana 2006 Heaton & Pendelton, 1981
Limitations of test measures
• Neuropsychological tests do not always translate to functioning in daily life (i.e., poor ecological validity of some measures). – Neuropsychological measures may be helpful for identifying at risk drivers
(i.e., poor visual-spatial skills), but an on-road test is the gold standard of driving function (Reger et al., 2004)
– Studies regarding measures of executive functioning are mixed (Chaytora,
Schmitter-Edgecombea, & Burr, 2006).
• A measure of response inhibition was positively correlated with informant ratings of executive functioning and adaptive behavior in daily life.
• A measure of switching was only correlated with informant ratings of adaptive functioning.
• Other measures of executive functioning (verbal fluency, nonverbal problem solving) were not correlated with informant ratings.
9/1/2016
11
Limitations of test measures
• Due to limitations of our measures, it is essential to gather additional data regarding functional performance – Rating scales of functional abilities through self-
report or caregiver report • Adaptive Behavior Assessment System (ABAS)
– Collateral interviews • Spouse/family members, teachers, employers,
counselors
• Gain insight into functioning in daily life
Case Example 1
• 20-year-old, right-handed male
• History of moderate TBI following car accident
• Inpatient rehabilitation
• Presenting concerns: – Easily frustrated and upset
– Problems inhibiting his behavior and comments in social situations
– Problems with peer relationships and job performance
9/1/2016
12
Case Example 1
*Scaled score
Domain Standard Score Descriptor
Intelligence Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS)
Full Scale IQ: 102 Verbal Comprehension Index: 95 Perceptual Reasoning Index: 109 Working Memory Index: 97 Processing Speed Index: 108
Average Average Average Average Average
Academic Functioning Woodcock Johnson Tests of Achievement (WJ Ach)
Broad Reading: 103 Broad Math: 99 Broad Written Expression: 95
Average Average Average
Learning and Memory Wechsler Memory Scale (WMS) *
Logical Memory Immediate: 8 Logical Memory Delayed: 8 Designs Immediate: 9 Designs Delayed: 10
Average Average Average Average
Executive Functioning Tower of London
Total Moves: 72 Below Average
Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF)
Parent and Self Report: Elevated Inhibit, Emotional Control, Self-Monitor scales
Clinically Significant
Case Example 1
• Strengths: Cognitive functioning within normal limits for age in most areas.
• Limitations: Weakness on a measure of executive function. Emotional and behavioral dysregulation causing problems with relationships and functioning at work.
9/1/2016
13
Case Example 2
• 17-year-old, right-handed female
• History of brain tumor treated with chemotherapy and radiation
• Presenting concerns:
– Having trouble completing activities as quickly as in the past
– Decline in school performance
Case Example 2 Domain Standard Score Descriptor
Intelligence Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS)
Full Scale IQ: 81 Verbal Comprehension Index: 110 Perceptual Reasoning Index: 85 Working Memory Index: 90 Processing Speed Index: 66
Low Average High Average Low Average Average Extremely Low
Academic Functioning Woodcock Johnson Tests of Achievement (WJ Ach)
Broad Reading*: 80 Broad Math*: 92 Broad Written Expression*: 85
Low Average Low Average Low Average
Fine Motor Skills Grooved Pegboard
Dominant Hand: 41 Nondominant Hand: 63
Extremely Low Extremely Low
Informant Ratings Adaptive Behavior Rating System (ABAS)
General Adaptive Composite: 72 Conceptual: 85 Social: 92 Practical: 62
Below Average Low Average Average Extremely Low
*Index includes academic fluencies
9/1/2016
14
Case Example 2
• Strengths: Many aspects of cognitive functioning are intact. No problems identified with emotional, behavioral, or social functioning.
• Limitations: Weak processing speed and fine motor skills, which are likely impacting academic and adaptive functioning.
Case Example 3
• 23-year-old, right-handed female
• History of special education services
• Presenting concerns:
– Help understanding current cognitive function to help with vocational placement
9/1/2016
15
Case Example 3 Domain Standard Score Descriptor
Intelligence Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS)
Full Scale IQ: 66 Verbal Comprehension Index: 65 Perceptual Reasoning Index: 60 Working Memory Index: 55 Processing Speed Index: 70
Extremely Low Extremely Low Extremely Low Extremely Low Below Average
Academic Functioning Woodcock Johnson Tests of Achievement (WJ Ach)
Broad Reading: 50 Broad Math: 55 Broad Written Expression: 60
Extremely Low Extremely Low Extremely Low
Learning and Memory Wechsler Memory Scale (WMS) *
Logical Memory Immediate: 3 Logical Memory Delayed: 3 Designs Immediate: 2 Designs Delayed: 3
Extremely Low Extremely Low Extremely Low Extremely Low
Executive Functioning Tower of London
Total Moves: 64 Extremely Low
Informant Ratings Adaptive Behavior Rating System (ABAS)
General Adaptive Composite: 58 Conceptual: 57 Social: 91 Practical: 43
Extremely Low Extremely Low Average Extremely Low
Case Example 3
• Strengths: Social skills, no emotional or behavioral concerns
• Limitations: Overall intellectual abilities, will likely have weaknesses in learning, problem solving, executive functions, and functional academic skills
9/1/2016
16
Case Example 4
• 16-year-old male
• History of two concussions
• Presenting concerns:
– Poor sleep
– Memory concerns (can’t remember information for tests at school)
– Family is concerned about poor self-esteem
Case Example 4 Domain Standard Score Descriptor
Intelligence Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS)
Full Scale IQ: 103 Verbal Comprehension Index: 106 Perceptual Reasoning Index: 115 Working Memory Index: 88 Processing Speed Index: 100
Average Average High Average Low Average Average
Academic Functioning Woodcock Johnson Tests of Achievement (WJ Ach)
Broad Reading: 112 Broad Math: 105 Broad Written Expression: 110
High Average Average High Average
Learning and Memory Wechsler Memory Scale (WMS) *
Logical Memory Immediate: 12 Logical Memory Delayed: 13 Designs Immediate: 11 Designs Delayed: 10
Average Average Average Average
Executive Functioning Tower of London
Total Moves: 104 Average
Behavior Assessment System for Children (BASC)
Parent and Self Report: Elevated Anxiety and Depression scales
Clinically Significant
9/1/2016
17
Case Example 4
• Strengths: Average to high average cognitive profile
• Limitations: Clinically significant symptoms of depression and anxiety. Poor sleep
What helps individuals to be successful despite areas of weakness?
• Family support
• Adherence to medical needs
• Counseling/Coping strategies
• Community/social support
• Assistive technology
• Speech, occupational, physical therapies
• Motivation, self-awareness
Dutta et al., 2008 Gamble, Dowler, & Orslene, 2006
Goldberg, Higgins, Raskind, & Herman, 2003 Werner, 2000
9/1/2016
18
Success includes more than IQ
• Duckworth and Seligman (2005) found that self-discipline, not IQ, predicted gains in academic performance over the school year in 8th graders
• Personality traits may predict academic success in college
– Conscientiousness predicted GPA, course performance, and attendance over SAT scores in undergraduate students (Conard, 2006)
Conclusion
• Many factors to consider when interpreting neurocognitive profiles
– Similar IQ may present very differently based on other factors
• Usually reflected in concluding or summary sections of reports
– Leads to different vocational goals and employability
9/1/2016
19
Resources
• Division 40 of American Psychological Association (APA)-Society of Neuropsychology
– http://www.scn40.org/links.html
• APA information on psychological evaluations
– http://www.apa.org/helpcenter/assessment.aspx
• Explanation of types of psychological testing
– http://psychcentral.com/lib/types-of-psychological-testing/?all=1
References Cahn-Weiner, D.A., Malloy, P.F., Boyle, P.A., Marran, M., & Salloway, S. (2000). Prediction of functional status from neuropsychological tests in community dwelling elderly individuals. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 14, 187-195. Chaytor, N. & Schmitter-Edgecombe, M. (2003). The ecological validity of neuropsychological tests: A review of literature on everyday cognitive skills. Neuropsychology Review, 13(4), 181-197. Chaytor, N., Schmitter-Edgecombe, M., Burr, R. (2006). Improving the ecological validity of executive functioning assessment. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 21(3), 217-227 Conard, M.A. (2006). Aptitude is not enough: How personality and behavior predict academic performance. Journal of Research in Personality, 40(3), 339-346. Duckworth, A.L., & Seligman, M.E.P. (2005) Self-disicpline outdoes IQ in predicting academic performance of adolescents. Psychological Science, 16(12), 939-944. Dutta, A., Gervey, R., Chan, F., Chou, C., & Ditchman, N. (2008). Vocational rehabilitation services and employment outcomes for people with disabilities: A united states study. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 18, 326-334. Farmer, J.E. & Eakman, A.M. (1995). The relationship between neuropsychological functioning and instrumental activities of daily living following acquired brain injury. Applied Neuropsychology, 2, 107-115. Gamble, M.J., Dowler, D.L., & Orslene. L.E. (2006). Assistive technology: Choosing the right tool for the right job. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 24, 73-80. Goldberg, R.J., Higgins, E.L., Raskind, M.H., & Herman, K.L. (2003). Predictors of success in individuals with learning disabilities: A qualitative analysis of a 20-year longitudinal study. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18(4), 222-236. Heaton, R.K. & Pendelton, M.G. (1981). Use of neuropsychological tests to predict adult patient’s everyday functioning. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 49, 807-821. Ready, R. E., Steirman, L., & Paulsen, J. S. (2001). Ecological validity of neuropsychological and personality measures of executive functions. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 15(3), 314-323. Reger, M., Welsh, R., Watson, G., Cholerton, B., Baker, L., Craft, S. (2004) The relationship between neuropsychological functioning and driving ability in dementia: A meta-analysis. Neuropsychology, 18, 85-93. Slick. D. (2006). Psychometrics in neuropsychological assessment. In E. Strauss, E.M Sherman, & O. Sphren (Eds): A Compendium of Neuropsychological Tests: Administration, Norms, and Commentary, Third Edition (pp. 1-43). Oxford: Oxford University Press, Inc. Spooner, D. M. & Pachana, N.A. (2006). Ecological validity in neuropsychological assessment: A case for greater consideration in research with neurologically intact populations. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 21, 327-337. Werner, E. (2000). Protective factors and individual resilience. In Shonkoff, J.P., 7 Meisels, S.J. (Eds): Handbook of Early Childhood Intervention (pp. 115-134) New York: Cambridge University Press. • http://www.apa.org/science/programs/testing/qualifications.pdf
9/1/2016
20
Questions?
Thank you for your attention!