Reference data from the automated neuropsychological assessment metrics for use in traumatic brain injury in an active duty military sample

Military Medicine

Volumn 173, Issue 9, 2008, Pages 836-852

  Vincent, Andrea S ^a   Bleiberg, Joseph ^b   Yan, Sam ^b   Ivins, Brian ^c   Reeves, Dennis L ^d   Schwab, Karen ^c   Gilliland, Kirby ^a   Schlegel, Robert ^a   Warden, Deborah ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA   (United States)

^b NATIONAL REHABILITATION HOSPITAL   (United States)

^c WALTER REED ARMY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^d Clinvest   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; ARMY; ARTICLE; AUTOMATED NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT METRICS; AUTOMATION; BRAIN CONCUSSION; CALCULATION; COGNITION; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MENTAL PERFORMANCE; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TEST; NORMAL HUMAN; PARAMETER; RATING SCALE; REFERENCE VALUE; SEX DIFFERENCE; SOLDIER; STANDARD; TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY;

EID: 51849108464     PISSN: 00264075     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.7205/MILMED.173.9.836     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Kane RL, Kay GG: Computerized assessment in neuropsychology: a review of tests and test batteries. Neuropsychol Rev 1992; 3: 1-117.
2. Schatz P, Browndyke J: Applications of computer-based neuropsychological assessment. J Head Trauma Rehabil 2002; 17: 395-410.
3. Reeves D, Kane R, Winter K, Raynsford K, Pancella T: Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metrics (ANAM): Test Administrator's Guide, Version 1.0. St. Louis, MO, Missouri Institute of Mental Health, 1993.
4. Englund CE, Reeves DL, Shingledecker CA, Thorne DR, Wilson KP, Hegge FW: Unified Tri-Services Cognitive Performance Assessment Battery (UTC-PAB), Part I: Design and Specification of the Battery. Report 87-10. Bethesda, MD, Naval Medical Research and Development Command, Joint Working Group on Drug Dependent Degradation in Military Performance, 1987.
5. Perez WA, Masline PJ, Ramsey EG, Urban KE: Unified Tri-Services Cognitive Performance Assessment Battery: Review and Methodology. Report AAMRL-TR-87-007. Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH, Armstrong Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory, 1987.
6. Santucci G, Farmer E, Grissett J, et al: Human Performance Assessment Methods. AGARDograph 308. Neuilly Sur Seine, France, NATO Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development, Working Group 12, 1989.
7. Reeves D, Winter K, Bleiberg J, Kane RL: ANAM Genogram: historical perspectives, description, and current endeavors. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 2007; 22(Suppl 1): 15-37.
8. Bleiberg J, Kane RL, Reeves DL, Garmoe WS, Halpern E: Factor analysis of computerized and traditional tests used in mild brain injury research. Clin Neuropsychol 2000; 14: 287-94.
9. Kabat MH, Kane RL, Jefferson AL, DiPino RK: Construct validity of selected Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metrics (ANAM) Battery Measures. Clin Neuropsychol 2001; 15: 498-507.
10. Short P, Cernich A, Kabat M, Wilken JA, Kane RL: Initial construct validation of frequently employed ANAM measures through structural equation modeling. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 2007; 22(Suppl 1): 63-77.
11. Bleiberg J, Garmoe WS, Halpern EL, Reeves DL, Nadler JD: Consistency of within-day and across-day performance after mild brain injury. Neuropsychiatry Neuropsychol Behav Neurol 1997; 10: 247-53.
12. Warden DL, Bleiberg J, Cameron KL, et al: Persistent prolongation of simple reaction time in sports concussion. Neurology 2001; 57: 524-6.
13. Williamson DJG, Scott JG, Adams RL: Traumatic brain injury. In: Neuropsychology for Clinical Practice, pp 9-64. Edited by Adams RL, Parsons OA, Culbertson JL, Nixon SJ. Washington, DC, American Psychology Association, 1996. Available at http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix= html&identifier=ADA18240.
14. Langlois JA, Rutland-Brown W, Thomas KE: Traumatic Brain Injury in the United States: Emergency Department Visits, Hospitalizations, and Deaths. Atlanta, GA, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2004.
15. Thurman D, Alverson C, Dunn K, Guerrero J, Sniezek J: Traumatic brain injury in the United States: a public health perspective. J Head Trauma Rehabil 1999; 14: 602-15.
16. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke: Traumatic brain injury: hope through research. Available at http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/ tbi/pubs_tbi/detail_tbi.htm 124893218; accessed April 2, 2007.
17. Ivins BJ, Schwab K, Warden D, et al: Traumatic brain injury in U.S. Army paratroopers: prevalence and character. J Trauma 2003; 55: 617-21.
18. Reeves DL, Bleiberg J, Roebuck-Spencer T, et al: Reference values for performance on the Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metrics V3.0 in an active-duty military sample. Milit Med 2006; 171: 982-4.
19. Roebuck-Spencer TM, Reeves DL, Bleiberg J, et al: Influence of demographics on computerized cognitive testing in a military sample. Mil Psychol 2008; 20: 187-203.
20. D'Agostino RB, Stephens MA: Goodness-of-Fit Techniques. New York, NY, Marcel Dekker, 1986.
21. Hannay HJ, Lezak MD: The neuropsychological examination: interpretation. In: Neuropsychological Assessment, pp 133-56. Edited by Lezak MD, Howieson DB, Loring DW. New York, NY, Oxford University Press, 2004.
22. Salthouse TA, Hedden T: Interpreting reaction time measures in between-group comparisons. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 2002; 24: 858-72.