23
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      A large-scale cross-sectional and longitudinal study into the ecological validity of neuropsychological test measures in neurologically intact people.

      Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology
      Activities of Daily Living, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cross-Sectional Studies, Ecology, Female, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Mental Processes, physiology, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, statistics & numerical data, Predictive Value of Tests, Principal Component Analysis, Reproducibility of Results, Retrospective Studies, Statistics as Topic, Young Adult

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          It is often assumed that neuropsychological measures are ecologically valid in 'normal' people, but this assumption has not yet been thoroughly evaluated. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the cross-sectional and longitudinal ecological validity of individual neuropsychological test scores and their composites in a large sample of neurologically intact people. Three neuropsychological composite measures were established, i.e. a "Memory Quotient", an "Executive functioning and Speed Quotient", and a "General Cognitive Quotient". The ecological validity of the individual neuropsychological measures and their composites was low to moderate. Multivariate models that included both neuropsychological and non-cognitive variables (i.e. demographic variables, depressive symptoms and anxiety) accounted for 4.6-21.4% of the variance in daily life functioning. The General Cognitive Quotient was the neuropsychological measure that was the most consistently related to daily life functioning.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Comments

          Comment on this article