4.2 Article Proceedings Paper

Construct validity of Hopkins Verbal Learning Test - Revised component process measures in an HIV-1 sample

期刊

ARCHIVES OF CLINICAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGY
卷 20, 期 8, 页码 1061-1071

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.acn.2005.06.007

关键词

human immunodeficiency virus; neuropsychological assessment; cognitive processes; episodic memory

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Executive dyscontrol of episodic verbal learning and memory secondary to prefrontostriatal circuit neuropathophysiology is a common feature of HIV-1 infection. Prior research indicates that standard clinical learning and recall indexes from Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised (HVLT-R) are among the most sensitive indicators of HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders. Emerging data support the validity of qualitative component process measures derived from the HVLT-R (e.g., Semantic Clustering); however, no prior studies have examined these particular indices of performance in an HIV-1-infected population. In the present study, we examined the construct validity of HVLT-R component process indices in a sample of 42 persons with HIV-1 infection and 29 demographically similar seronegative comparison participants. The HIV-1 sample performed significantly below the seronegative group on Total and Delayed Recall, Semantic Clustering, and the Retrieval Index. No between-group differences were observed on Serial Clustering, Pair Frequency, Learning, Repetitions, Semantic False Positive Recognition Errors, or the Recognition Discrimination Index. In addition, the HVLT-R component process measures demonstrated evidence of convergent and divergent validity with standard clinical tests in the HIV-1 sample. Findings support the construct validity of HVLT-R component process measures and are commensurate with prior literature indicating that HIV-1 disease is associated with deficient executive control of encoding and retrieval within verbal episodic memory. (c) 2005 National Academy of Neuropsychology. Published by Elsevier 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

4.2
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