Third, because specific inclusionary criteria were used for education level, scores should be used cautiously with patients that fall outside the range used in the study. Fourth, specificity data from the moderate–severe TBI group provide insight into performance validity of moderate–severe

TBI patients, but must be used prudently. The range of injury severity in the moderate–severe group (mild-complicated to severe), and the lack of sensitivity data from a moderate–severe/MND group, limits the ability to determine whether a particular score reflects an inaccurate representation of ability or an actual impairment. For example, a patient with a CB-839 datasheet mild-complicated TBI who attains a score that less than 10% of moderate–severe patients achieved is likely an inaccurate representation of ability, while a Selleck R788 severe TBI patient with the

same score probably reflects an actual impairment. Results indicate that specific scores on the Stroop can help determine performance validity in mild TBI patients. Scores consistent with those produced by patients who met published criteria for malingering provide evidence that the test performance is not an accurate representation of cognitive ability. Thus, the scores can be used to determine whether Stroop performance is valid in mild TBI patients. These data can also be used as part of a malingering diagnosis system (e.g., Slick et al., 1999), but as exemplified see more in the false-positive analysis and mild TBI/Not MND findings, it is important to consider all of the relevant patient history. Although this study focuses on mild TBI, performance validity is an essential component of testing, and clinicians are encouraged to assess performance validity routinely in other conditions. “
“The construct and criterion validities of the parent version of the Behaviour Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) were evaluated in a sample of 100 6- to 16-year-old children with traumatic

brain injury (TBI). Maximum-likelihood factor analysis identified two latent constructs that largely replicated the factor structure reported for the standardization sample, with the notable exception that the Inhibit scale covaried primarily with the metacognition factor and not with behavioural regulation factor. Only the former factor demonstrated evidence for sensitivity to the severity of TBI. Results on both factors were affected by a premorbid history of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder or other out-patient psychiatric treatment. It is concluded that the BRIEF has construct and criterion validity in the evaluation of children with TBI but that findings on this instrument can only be interpreted within the context of review of the child’s premorbid history. “
“In 2001, Ramachandran and Hubbard introduced the cross-activation model of grapheme-colour synaesthesia.