Time-to-completion cutoffs are valuable additions to both tests. They can function as independent validity indicators or enhance the sensitivity of accuracy scores without requiring additional measures or extending standard administration time.

No abstract

No abstract

BACKGROUND: Balloon guide catheters are increasingly used to improve clot retrieval by temporarily stopping proximal blood flow during endovascular thrombectomy. PURPOSE: Our aim was to provide a summary of the literature comparing the procedural and clinical outcomes of endovascular thrombectomy with or without balloon guide catheters, depending on the first-line technique used.DATA SOURCES: We used PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. STUDY SELECTION:We chose studies that compared using balloon guide catheters with not using them.DATA ANALYSIS: Random effects meta-analysis was performed to compare the procedural outcomes measured as the first-pass effect, successful reperfusion, number of passes, procedural duration, arterial puncture to reperfusion time, distal emboli, and clinical outcomes.DATA SYNTHESIS: Overall, a meta-analysis of 16 studies (5507 patients, 50.8% treated with balloon guide catheters and 49.2% without them) shows that the use of balloon guide catheters increases the odds of achieving a first-pass effect (

A link between noncredible responding and low scores on the Grooved Pegboard Test (GPB) is well documented in the clinical literature. However, no specific validity cutoffs have emerged in previous research. This study was designed to examine the classification accuracy of various demographically adjusted cutoffs on the GPB against established measures of performance validity. Analyses were based on a mixed clinical sample of 190 patients (52.1% female) medically referred for neuropsychological assessment. Mean age of participants was 44.1 years, with a mean education of 13.9 years. Criterion measures were the Recognition Memory Test and 3 composites based on several embedded validity indicators. A T score Յ29 for either hand or Յ31 on both hands were reliable markers of invalid performance (sensitivity ϭ .29 -.63; specificity ϭ .85-.91). Ipsative analyses revealed that these T score-based cutoffs have zero false positive rates. Failing these cutoffs had no consistent relationship with overall cognitive functioning. A moderate relationship between GPB failure and self-reported anxiety and depression emerged on face-valid screening measures. There was also a moderate relationship between GPB failure and Personality Assessment Inventory scales measuring somatic complaints, borderline traits, antisocial features, and substance use. The newly introduced GPB validity cutoffs were effective at separating credible and noncredible performance on neuropsychological testing. The complex relationship between failing the GPB and emotional problems is consistent with the psychogenic interference hypothesis. It may provide insight into the mechanism behind invalid responding and thus warrants further investigation.