Communication is key: the utility of a revised neuropsychological report format

Baum, Katherine T.; Thomsen, Christian von; Elam, Megan; Murphy, Chris; Gerstle, Melissa; Austin, Cynthia A.; Beebe, Dean W.

doi:10.1080/13854046.2017.1413208

Cited by 28 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is a higher reading level than other clinical reports. One study reviewed >55,000 radiology reports from multiple specialties and found that the average reading level varied from a high school junior to college sophomore, while a review of 240 neuropsychiatric reports found average reading levels between a high school sophomore and college freshman (Baum et al, ; Trofimova, Vey, Safdar, Duszak, & Kadom, ). From this limited information, it may be concluded that genomics reports are more difficult to read.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Efforts to lower readability by removing or rewording unnecessarily complex writing (i.e., jargon) may improve provider (and patient) comprehension. However, it has been argued that reducing writing complexity can lead to vagueness, decrease accuracy, and other negative downstream effects when interpreting results (Baum et al, ). Thus, a balance between clarity and simplicity is key to improving readability while maintaining quality.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A comparison of genomic laboratory reports and observations that may enhance their clinical utility for providers and patients

Erby

Fiallos

et al. 2019

Molec Gen & Gen Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To assess clinical chromosomal microarray (CMA) genomic testing reports for the following: (a) usage of reporting elements consistent with 2011 ACMG guidelines and other elements identified in the primary literature, (b) information quality, and (c) readability. Methods We retrospectively analyzed genomic testing reports from 2011 to 2016 provided to, or by our laboratory to aid in clinical detection and interpretation of copy number variants. Analysis was restricted to the following sections: interpretation, recommendations, limitations, and citations. Analysis included descriptive characteristics, reporting elements, reading difficulty using the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and quality ratings using a subset of questions adapted from the DISCERN‐Genetics questionnaire. Results The analysis included 44 unique reports from 26 laboratories comprising four groups: specialty laboratories (SL; N = 9), reference laboratories (RL; N = 12), hospital laboratories (HL; N = 10), and university‐based laboratories (UL; N = 13). There were 23 abnormal/pathogenic reports and 21 of uncertain/unknown significance. Nine laboratories did not include one or more pieces of information based on ACMG guidelines; only one of ten laboratories reported condition‐specific management/treatment information when available and relevant. Average quality ratings and readability scores were not significantly different between laboratory types or result classification. Conclusions Reporting practices for most report elements varied widely; however, readability and quality did not differ significantly between laboratory types. Management and treatment information, even for well‐known conditions, are rarely included. Effectively communicating test results may be improved if certain reporting elements are incorporated. Recommendations to improve laboratory reports are provided.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of genomic laboratory reports and observations that may enhance their clinical utility for providers and patients

Erby

Fiallos

et al. 2019

Molec Gen & Gen Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There was a strong consensus that it is important for psychologists to identify and recommend evidence-based and realistic supports and interventions for the individuals whom they assess (Baum et al, 2017; Cheung et al, 2014; Donders, 2010; Ostojic-Aitkens et al, 2021). There should be a manageable number of recommendations that are customized to the individual’s needs.…”

Section: Topics Where Consensus Was Achieved With Minimal Debatementioning

confidence: 99%

Lessons Learned: Achieving Consensus About Learning Disability Assessment and Diagnosis

Williams

Wiener

Lennox³

et al. 2022

Canadian Journal of School Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current paper describes the process used for developing the Guidelines for Diagnosis and Assessment of Children, Adolescents, and Adults with Learning Disabilities-Consensus Statement and Supporting Documents, and the rationale for some of the decisions. The guidelines were developed by a cross-sectoral working group of psychologists who achieved a consensus on the criteria for diagnosis and the assessment process. We outline key features of the guidelines, describe topics where the group achieved consensus quickly and topics for which there was considerable debate (e.g., intelligence testing, ability/achievement discrepancy, and processing deficits). The group members shared information with each other about topics such as the advantages of early assessment, the importance of formally assessing effort and motivation, and assessment of culturally and linguistically diverse individuals. We conclude with the lessons learned and professional challenges regarding contextual influences on LD assessment and diagnosis and dissemination of research to practitioners.

show abstract

“…Understanding written reports and remembering neuropsychological feedback might be even more challenging for people with cognitive impairments or low literacy [18]. Adapting these reports is often necessary to make findings more understandable for patients and family [19].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Exploratory Study of the Development and Pilot Testing of an Interactive Visual Tool of Neuropsychological Test Results in Memory Clinics

Gruters

Ramakers

Stiekema

et al. 2021

JAD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Neuropsychological feedback is an important part of the neuropsychological assessment process. However, patients have difficulties remembering this information. Objective: The aim of this study was to develop a web-based visual tool to improve the understanding of neuropsychological results, information retention, and psychologist-patient communication. Methods: The visual tool was developed and optimized using an iterative three-phase stepwise approach to determine its usability, technology acceptance, and feasibility in a memory clinic population. Feedback from different user perspectives (patients, family members, and psychologists) was obtained in each phase using a multimethod approach (e.g. a multidisciplinary brainstorm session, think-aloud sessions, focus groups). The prototype was subsequently tested in a pilot study. Results: The first phases offered insights that led to optimization of the prototype. On a scale ranging from 0 to 100, psychologists evaluated the usability as high [88.1±7.6,70–87]. During the pilot study, both patients and significant others gave positive feedback, but information retention in patients remained low. All participants thought the benefits of the visual tool included seeing cognitive strengths and weaknesses with a translation to daily life all at one glance and receiving feedback on paper to take home. Important barriers were mentioned by psychologists, such as a limited set of tests included and no integration with hospital systems. Conclusion: Overall, patients, family members, and psychologists reported that a visual display of the cognitive profile with insights into daily life had added value to clinical practice. Feedback from the pilot study was adopted in the tool for future implementation purposes.

show abstract

Communication is key: the utility of a revised neuropsychological report format

Cited by 28 publications

References 19 publications

A comparison of genomic laboratory reports and observations that may enhance their clinical utility for providers and patients

A comparison of genomic laboratory reports and observations that may enhance their clinical utility for providers and patients

Lessons Learned: Achieving Consensus About Learning Disability Assessment and Diagnosis

An Exploratory Study of the Development and Pilot Testing of an Interactive Visual Tool of Neuropsychological Test Results in Memory Clinics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About