There have been a number of studies that have examined the factor structure of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale IV (WAIS-IV) using the standardization sample. In this study, we investigate its factor structure on a clinical neuropsychology sample of mixed aetiology. Correlated factor, higher-order and bi-factor models are all tested. Overall, the results suggest that the WAIS-IV will be suitable for use with this population.

Objectives: There has been little research in the UK regarding young people’s experiences of disclosure of psychological difficulties relating to coeliac disease (CD) to others, particularly healthcare professionals. This study sought to address this systematically with a focus on the lived experiences of young people with CD. This study aimed to gain insight into how paediatric gastroenterology services could improve patient experience for those with CD and support identification of patients who may benefit from further psychological support. Design: This study used interpretive phenomenological analysis (IPA) of patient accounts.Methods: Seven young people with CD (aged 11-16 years) were recruited from a UK hospital paediatric gastroenterology service. Semi-structured interviews were carried out and verbatim transcripts were analysed using IPA to explore young people’s experiences of CD and why they might feel able or unable to disclose psychological difficulties associated with their condition to clinicians. Results: Three superordinate themes emerged from the data. The first encapsulated experiences of adjusting to the diagnosis within a developmental context, including the role of adults in information provision and the importance of peer support. The second outlined experiences of managing perceived or actual stigma regarding others’ perceptions of the condition and themselves. The third incorporated perceived barriers to disclosure relating to power, safety, and beliefs about the role of medical professionals.Conclusions: Findings highlight the importance of clinicians continually providing developmentally appropriate information to young people and actively breaking down barriers to disclosure through body language and use of clear questions regarding emotional experiences.

The Covid-19 pandemic has presented health care professionals with unprecedented situations, challenges, and dilemmas in both their professional and personal lives. This brief reflective piece describes the process by which its authors experienced and reflected on working with a patient with a brain injury that emerged after receipt of a Covid-19 vaccine and was understood by the clinical team and patient to likely be vaccine related. Particular focus is given to the impact on personal risk appraisals while simultaneously holding and maintaining professional roles within an inpatient neuropsychology department, with consideration of the central role of supervision and a safe reflective space when working in highly complex areas of healthcare.

Aim: Investigating the relationship between neurocognitive performance and the 2005 Mental Capacity Act (MCA) functional test in adults with a neurological diagnosis.Methods: Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Scopus and Web of Science were searched in April 2021. Included studies reported cognitive test outcomes in adults with neurological diagnoses in relation to one or more of the four pillars of the MCA functional test (‘understanding’, ‘retention’, ‘using and weighing-up information’, ‘communication’). A narrative synthesis was structured in accordance with each pillar of the functional test. The NIH observational studies tool enabled quality assessment.Results: Of the 3,996 studies screened, 34 were included. Significant relationships between cognitive scores and capacity outcomes were identified in all but one study. The most consistent finding related to tests of information processing, executive functioning, and attention/working memory correlating strongly with ‘understanding’ in different samples. The relationships between other pillars and cognitive outcomes were seldom reported, with inconsistent findings. Conclusions: The pillars of the functional test are seldom referred to separately. Further research which clearly operationalises the pillars of capacity assessed is required to elucidate both the utility and limits of cognitive measures in supporting complex functional assessments in line with the MCA.