4.7 Article

Poor symptom and performance validity in regularly referred Hospital outpatients: Link with standard clinical measures, and role of incentives

期刊

PSYCHIATRY RESEARCH
卷 239, 期 -, 页码 47-53

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.psychres.2016.02.061

关键词

Symptom validity; Performance validity; Assessment; Hospital outpatients; Amsterdam Short-Term Memory test (ASTM); Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology (SIMS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We investigated the frequency of symptom validity test (SVT) failure and its clinical correlates in a large, heterogeneous sample of hospital outpatients referred for psychological assessment for clinical purposes. We studied patients (N=469), who were regularly referred for assessment to the psychology departments of five hospitals. Background characteristics, including information about incentives, were obtained with a checklist completed by the clinician. As a measure of over-reporting, the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology (SIMS) was administered to all patients. The Amsterdam Short Term Memory test (ASTM), a cognitive underperformance measure, was only administered to patients who were referred for a neuropsychological assessment. Symptom over-reporting occurred in a minority of patients, ranging from 12% to 19% in the main diagnostic patient groups. Patients with morbid obesity had a low rate of over-reporting (1%). The SIMS was positively associated with levels of self-reported psychological symptoms. Cognitive underperformance occurred in 29.3% of the neuropsychological assessments. The ASTM was negatively associated with memory test performance. We found no association between SVT failure and financial incentives. Our results support the recommendation to routinely evaluate symptom validity in clinical assessments of hospital patients. The dynamics behind invalid symptom reporting need to be further elucidated. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据