A computerized test battery sensitive to mild and severe brain injury

MedGenMed Medscape General Medicine

Volumn 10, Issue 4, 2008, Pages

  Gualtieri, C Thomas ^a,b   Johnson, Lynda G ^a,b  

^a North Carolina Neuropsychiatry Clinics   (United States)

^b North Carolina Neuropsychiatry Clinics   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CNS VITAL SIGNS BATTERY; COGNITION; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FEMALE; HUMAN; INJURY SEVERITY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NATURALISTIC INQUIRY; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TEST; POSTCONCUSSION SYNDROME; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; RELIABILITY; SCORING SYSTEM; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY; VALIDATION PROCESS; VERBAL MEMORY; VISUAL MEMORY; ADOLESCENT; BRAIN INJURY; COGNITIVE DEFECT; COMPUTER INTERFACE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; EVALUATION; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; NEUROLOGIC DISEASE; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; BRAIN INJURIES; COGNITION DISORDERS; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DIAGNOSIS, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NERVOUS SYSTEM DISEASES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SOFTWARE; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE;

EID: 42549164637     PISSN: 15310132     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Banks ME. The role of neuropsychological testing and evaluation: when to refer. Adolesc Med. 2002;13:643-662.
2. Clifton GL, Kreutzer JS, Choi SC, et al. Relationship between Glasgow Outcome Scale and neuropsychological measures after brain injury. Neurosurgery. 1993;33:34-38.
3. Franzen MD. Neuropsychological assessment in traumatic brain injury. Crit Care Nurs Q. 2000;23:58-64.
4. Lynch WJ. Assessment in traumatic brain injury: update on recent developments. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2002;17:66-70.
5. Banks ME. The role of neuropsychological testing and evaluation: when to refer. Adolesc Med. 2002;13:643-662.
6. Goldstein M. Traumatic brain injury: a silent epidemic. Ann Neurol. 990;27:327.
7. Comerford VE, Geffen GM, May C, Medland SE, Geffen LB. A rapid screen of the severity of mild traumatic brain injury. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2002;24:409-419.
8. Doane BM, Greve KW, Bianchini KJ. Agreement between the abbreviated and standard portland digit recognition test. Clin Neuropsychol 2005;19:99-104.
9. Farmer JE, Frank RG. The brain injury rehabilitation scale (BIRS): a measure of change during post-acute rehabilitation. Brain Inj. 1988;2:323-331.
10. Collie A, Darby D, Maruff P. Computerised cognitive assessment of athletes with sports related head injury. Br J Sports Med. 2001;35:297-302.
11. Lynch WJ. Computerized assessment software update 1999. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 1999;14:325-328.
12. Kane RL, Kay GG. Computerized assessment in neuropsychology: a review of tests and test batteries. Neuropsychol Rev. 1992;3:1-117.
13. Weber B, Fritze J, Schneider B, Simminger D, Maurer K. Computerized self-assessment in psychiatric inpatients: acceptability, feasibility and influence of computer attitude. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1998;98:140-145.
14. Collie A, Maruff P, McStephen M, Darby DG. Psychometric issues associated with computerised neuropsychological assessment of concussed athletes. Br J Sports Med 2003 December;37(6):556-9.
15. Collie A, Maruff P, McStephen M, Darby D. Are Reliable Change (RC) calculations appropriate for determining the extent of cognitive change in concussed athletes? Br J Sports Med. 2003;37:370-372.
16. Collie A, Maruff P, Makdissi M, McCrory P, McStephen M, Darby D. CogSport: reliability and correlation with conventional cognitive tests used in postconcussion medical evaluations. Clin J Sport Med. 2003;13:28-32.
17. Iverson GL, Lovell, MR, Collins MW. Interpreting change on ImPACT following sport concussion. Clin Neuropsychol. 2003;17:460-467.
18. Gualtieri CT, Johnson LG, Benedict KB. Reliability and validity of a new computerized test battery. Program and abstracts of the 32nd International Neuropsychological Society. Annual Meeting; February 4-7, 2004; Baltimore, Maryland.
19. Gualtieri CT, Johnson. LG. Neurocognitive testing supports a broader concept of mild cognitive impairment. Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen. 2006;20:359-366.
20. Macciocchi SN, Reid DB, Barth JT. Disability following head injury. Curr Opin Neurol. 1993;6:773-777.
21. Taylor EM. The appraisal of children with cerebral deficits. Cambridge, Mass: Havard University Press; 1959.
22. Rey A. L'examen clinique en psychologie. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France; 1964.
23. Smith DW, Jones KL. Recognizable Patterns of Human Malformation. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, Pa: Saunders; 1982.
24. Le TH, Pardo JV, Hu X. 4 T-fMRI study of nonspatial shifting of selective attention: cerebellar and parietal contributions. J Neurophysiol. 1998;79:1535-1548.
25. Nagahama Y, Sadato N, Yamauchi H, et al. Neural activity during attention shifts between object features. Neuroreport. 1998;9:2633-2638.
26. Rosvold HE, Delgado JM. The effect on delayed-alternation test performance of stimulating or destroying electrically structures within the frontal lobes of the monkey's brain. J Compar Physiol Psychol. 1956;49:365-372.
27. Belanger HG, Curtiss G, Demery JA, Lebowitz BK, Vanderploeg RD. Factors moderating neuropsychological outcomes following mild traumatic brain injury: a meta-analysis. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2005;11:215-227.
28. Dikmen S, Temkin N, McLean A, Wyler A, Machamer J. Memory and head injury severity. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1987;50:1613-1618.
29. Casner JA, Weinheimer B, Gualtieri CT. Naltrexone and self-injurious behavior: a retrospective population study. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 1996;16:389-394.
30. Gualtieri CT. Brain Injury and Mental Retardation. Psychopharmacology and Neuropsychiatry. Philadelphia, Pa: Lippincott Williams and Wilkens; 2002.
31. Malec JF, Kragness M, Evans RW, Finlay KL, Kent A, Lezak MD. Further psychometric evaluation and revision of the Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory in a national sample. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2003;18:479-492.
32. Vanderploeg RD, Curtiss G, Belanger HG. Long-term neuropsychological outcomes following mild traumatic brain injury. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2005;11:228-236.
33. Ewing R, McCarthy D, Gronwall D, Wrightson P. Persisting effects of concussion shown by impaired performance at altitude. J Clin. Neuropsychol. 1981;2:147-155.
34. Stuss DT, Benson DF. The Frontal Lobes. New York: Raven Press; 1986.
35. Spikman JM, van Zomeren AH, Deelman BG. Deficits of attention after closed-head injury: slowness only? J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1996;18:755-767.
36. Weber B, Fritze J, Schneider B, Kuhner T, Maurer K. Bias in computerized neuropsychological assessment of depressive disorders caused by computer attitude. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2002;105:126-130.
37. Gur RC, Ragland JD, Moberg PJ, et al. Computerized neurocognitive scanning: I. Methodology and validation in healthy people. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2001;25:766-776.
38. Mitrushina MN, Boone KB, D'Elia LF. Handbook of Normative Data for Neuropsychological Assessment. New York: Oxford University Press; 1999.
39. Lezak MD. Neuropsychological Assessment. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 1983.
40. Hindmarch I. Psychomotor function and psychoactive drugs. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1980; 10:189-209.
41. Mead LA, Mayer AR, Bobholz JA, et al. Neural basis of the Stroop interference task: response competition or selective attention? J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2002;8:735-742.
42. Louis WJ, Mander AG, Dawson M, O'Callaghan C, Conway EL. Use of computerized neuropsychological tests (CANTAB) to assess cognitive effects of antihypertensive drugs in the elderly. Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery. J Hypertens. 1999;17(12 Pt 2):1813-1819.
43. Robbins TW, James M, Owen AM, et al. A study of performance on tests from The CANTAB battery sensitive to frontal lobe dysfunction in a large sample of normal volunteers: implications for theories of executive functioning and cognitive aging. Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 1998;4:474-490.
44. Collie A, Maruff P, Makdissi M, McCrory P, McStephen M, Darby D. CogSport: reliability and correlation with conventional cognitive tests used in postconcussion medical evaluations. Clin J Sport Med. 2003;13:28-32.
45. Sykes DH, Douglas VI, Weiss G, Minde KK. Attention in hyperactive children and the effect of methylphenidate (ritalin). J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 1971;12:129-139.
46. Epstein JN, Johnson DE, Varia IM, Conners CK. Neuropsychological assessment of response inhibition in adults with ADHD. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2001;23:362-371.
47. Noland JS, Singer LT, Short EJ, et al. Prenatal drug exposure and selective attention in preschoolers. Neurotoxicol Teratol. 2005;27:429-438.
48. McGee RA, Clark SE, Symons DK. Does the Conners' Continuous Performance Test aid in ADHD diagnosis? J Abnormal Child Psychol. 2000;28:415-424.
49. Lindsay RL, Tomazic T, Levine MD, Accardo PJ. Attentional function as measured by a Continuous Performance Task in children with dyscalculia. J Development Behavior Pediatr. 2001;22:287-292.
50. Mirksy AF, van Buren JM. On the nature of the "absence" in centrencephalic epilepsy: a study of some behavioral, electroencephalographic and autonomic factors. Electroencephalography Clin Neurophysiol. 1965;18:348.
51. Wohlberg GW, Kornetsky C. Sustained attention in remitted schizophrenics. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1973;28:533-537.
52. Vadhan NP, Serper MR, Harvey PD, Chou JC, Cancro R. Convergent validity and neuropsychological correlates of the schedule for the assessment of negative symptoms (SANS) attention subscale. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2001;189:637-641.
53. Riccio CA, Reynolds CR. Continuous performance tests are sensitive to ADHD in adults but lack specificity. A review and critique for differential diagnosis. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2001;931:113-139.
54. Barkley RA. A review of stimulant drug research with hyperactive children. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 1977;18:137-165.
55. Riccio CA, Waldrop JJ, Reynolds CR, Lowe P. Effects of stimulants on the continuous performance test (CPT): implications for CPT use and interpretation. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2001;13:326-335.
56. Dougherty DM, Marsh DM, Moeller FG, Chokshi RV, Rosen VC. Effects of moderate and high doses of alcohol on attention, impulsivity, discriminability, and response bias in immediate and delayed memory task performance. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2000;24:1702-1711.
57. Levin ED, Conners CK, Silva D, Canu W, March J. Effects of chronic nicotine and methylphenidate in adults with attention deficit/ hyperactivity disorder. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2001;9:83-90.
58. Hutt SJ, Jackson PM, Belsham A, Higgins G. Perceptual-motor behaviour in relation to blood phenobarbitone level: a preliminary report. Dev Med Child Neurol. 1968;10:626-632.