2021
DOI: 10.1007/s12207-021-09402-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Introducing Alternative Validity Cutoffs to Improve the Detection of Non-credible Symptom Report on the BRIEF

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 165 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The validity of the performances, as well as the presence of non-congruent symptoms, was measured with the BRIEF-A 70 and the WAIS-IV Digit Span subtest, giving us an opportunity to evaluate non-credible performances and their validity. 71 The validity analysis revealed a homogeneity of performance in the 102 patients selected for this study.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The validity of the performances, as well as the presence of non-congruent symptoms, was measured with the BRIEF-A 70 and the WAIS-IV Digit Span subtest, giving us an opportunity to evaluate non-credible performances and their validity. 71 The validity analysis revealed a homogeneity of performance in the 102 patients selected for this study.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The BRIEF‐A was used to measure the validity of patients' responses, as well as the presence of any noncredible symptoms (Abeare et al, 2021 ; Harrison et al, 2021 ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We used the BRIEF-A ( Abeare et al., 2021 ) and WAIS-IV digit-span measures ( Kanser, Rapport, Hanks, & Patrick, 2021 ) to measure the validity of the patients’ performance, the validity (i.e., congruence) of their symptoms, and the presence of any symptoms to be considered with care. The default validity check of the BRIEF-A (negativity scale ≥ 6) yielded good-to-excellent results for all participants, as did our use of the cutoff purposed by Abeare and colleagues (2021 ) (failure on ≥4 of the individual scales).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We used the BRIEF-A ( Abeare et al., 2021 ) and WAIS-IV digit-span measures ( Kanser, Rapport, Hanks, & Patrick, 2021 ) to measure the validity of the patients’ performance, the validity (i.e., congruence) of their symptoms, and the presence of any symptoms to be considered with care. The default validity check of the BRIEF-A (negativity scale ≥ 6) yielded good-to-excellent results for all participants, as did our use of the cutoff purposed by Abeare and colleagues (2021 ) (failure on ≥4 of the individual scales). These good-to-excellent scores on the BRIEF-A, were partially confirmed by the validity measured by the WAIS-IV Digit Span Forward and Backward with a threshold of ≥5 measured in a healthy control population and which simulated ( Kanser et al., 2021 ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%