4.3 Article

Practice parameters facilitating adoption of advanced technologies for enhancing neuropsychological assessment paradigms

Journal

CLINICAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGIST
Volume 32, Issue 1, Pages 16-41

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/13854046.2017.1337932

Keywords

Computerized testing; neurocognition; neuropsychological test validity; neuropsychological assessment

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Clinical neuropsychologists have long underutilized computer technologies for neuropsychological assessment. Given the rapid advances in technology (e.g. virtual reality; tablets; iPhones) and the increased accessibility in the past decade, there is an on-going need to identify optimal specifications for advanced technologies while minimizing potential sources of error. Herein, we discuss concerns raised by a joint American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology/National Academy of Neuropsychology position paper. Moreover, we proffer parameters for the development and use of advanced technologies in neuropsychological assessments. Method: We aim to first describe software and hardware configurations that can impact a computerized neuropsychological assessment. This is followed by a description of best practices for developers and practicing neuropsychologists to minimize error in neuropsychological assessments using advanced technologies. We also discuss the relevance of weighing potential computer error in light of possible errors associated with traditional testing. Throughout there is an emphasis on the need for developers to provide bench test results for their software's performance on various devices and minimum specifications (documented in manuals) for the hardware (e.g. computer, monitor, input devices) in the neuropsychologist's practice. Conclusion: Advances in computerized assessment platforms offer both opportunities and challenges. The challenges can appear daunting but are a manageable and require informed consumers who can appreciate the issues and ask pertinent questions in evaluating their options.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available