Estimating the predictive value of the Test of Memory Malingering: An illustrative example for clinicians

Sid E. O'Bryant, John A Lucas

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

44 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Recent years have witnessed an explosion in the amount of research literature dedicated to the identification of symptom exaggeration and/or malingering in neuropsychological assessments. Additionally, there is now a growing literature devoted to estimating the base rates of symptom exaggeration/malingering in a range of populations and settings. However, very little literature has been devoted to estimating the positive predictive value (PPV) or negative predictive value (NPV) of these assessment devices and/or strategies. The current project was conducted to provide an illustrative example of how to use the research literature to calculate both PPV and NPV in everyday clinical practice. When the Word Memory Test (WMT) was used as the "gold standard" to which the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) was compared, the TOMM achieved very high PPV (.98) and acceptable NPV (.78). How to incorporate the strategy used into clinical practice is discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)533-540
Number of pages8
JournalClinical Neuropsychologist
Volume20
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2006

Fingerprint

Malingering
Predictive Value of Tests
Explosions
Research
Equipment and Supplies
Clinicians
Population

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Cite this

Estimating the predictive value of the Test of Memory Malingering : An illustrative example for clinicians. / O'Bryant, Sid E.; Lucas, John A.

In: Clinical Neuropsychologist, Vol. 20, No. 3, 01.09.2006, p. 533-540.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{d65224928cc14f79b9e740dfe94c0b5d,
title = "Estimating the predictive value of the Test of Memory Malingering: An illustrative example for clinicians",
abstract = "Recent years have witnessed an explosion in the amount of research literature dedicated to the identification of symptom exaggeration and/or malingering in neuropsychological assessments. Additionally, there is now a growing literature devoted to estimating the base rates of symptom exaggeration/malingering in a range of populations and settings. However, very little literature has been devoted to estimating the positive predictive value (PPV) or negative predictive value (NPV) of these assessment devices and/or strategies. The current project was conducted to provide an illustrative example of how to use the research literature to calculate both PPV and NPV in everyday clinical practice. When the Word Memory Test (WMT) was used as the {"}gold standard{"} to which the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) was compared, the TOMM achieved very high PPV (.98) and acceptable NPV (.78). How to incorporate the strategy used into clinical practice is discussed.",
author = "O'Bryant, {Sid E.} and Lucas, {John A}",
year = "2006",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/13854040590967568",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "20",
pages = "533--540",
journal = "The Clinical neuropsychologist",
issn = "1385-4046",
publisher = "Swets & Zeitlinger",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Estimating the predictive value of the Test of Memory Malingering

T2 - An illustrative example for clinicians

AU - O'Bryant, Sid E.

AU - Lucas, John A

PY - 2006/9/1

Y1 - 2006/9/1

N2 - Recent years have witnessed an explosion in the amount of research literature dedicated to the identification of symptom exaggeration and/or malingering in neuropsychological assessments. Additionally, there is now a growing literature devoted to estimating the base rates of symptom exaggeration/malingering in a range of populations and settings. However, very little literature has been devoted to estimating the positive predictive value (PPV) or negative predictive value (NPV) of these assessment devices and/or strategies. The current project was conducted to provide an illustrative example of how to use the research literature to calculate both PPV and NPV in everyday clinical practice. When the Word Memory Test (WMT) was used as the "gold standard" to which the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) was compared, the TOMM achieved very high PPV (.98) and acceptable NPV (.78). How to incorporate the strategy used into clinical practice is discussed.

AB - Recent years have witnessed an explosion in the amount of research literature dedicated to the identification of symptom exaggeration and/or malingering in neuropsychological assessments. Additionally, there is now a growing literature devoted to estimating the base rates of symptom exaggeration/malingering in a range of populations and settings. However, very little literature has been devoted to estimating the positive predictive value (PPV) or negative predictive value (NPV) of these assessment devices and/or strategies. The current project was conducted to provide an illustrative example of how to use the research literature to calculate both PPV and NPV in everyday clinical practice. When the Word Memory Test (WMT) was used as the "gold standard" to which the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) was compared, the TOMM achieved very high PPV (.98) and acceptable NPV (.78). How to incorporate the strategy used into clinical practice is discussed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33747088163&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33747088163&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/13854040590967568

DO - 10.1080/13854040590967568

M3 - Article

C2 - 16895864

AN - SCOPUS:33747088163

VL - 20

SP - 533

EP - 540

JO - The Clinical neuropsychologist

JF - The Clinical neuropsychologist

SN - 1385-4046

IS - 3

ER -