The reliability and validity of the Test of Adaptive Behavior in Schizophrenia (TABS)

Velligan, Dawn I.; Diamond, Pamela; Glahn, David C.; Ritch, Janice; Maples, Natalie; Castillo, Desiree; Miller, Alexander L.

doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2006.10.007

Cited by 47 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, associations have been found between recovery and participation in peer support (Corrigan, 2006), community integration, employment and receipt of social security (Lloyd et al, 2009). Another fruitful line of enquiry would be to use measures of functional capacity, such as the Independent Living Skills Survey (Perivoliotis et al, 2004), which has both informant and self-report formats, or performance-based assessments such as the Test of Adaptive Behaviour in Schizophrenia (Velligan et al, 2007). However, since consumerdefined recovery is highly individual, it is important that any objectively observable measures represent the personal goals of the client.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do clinical outcome measures assess consumer-defined recovery?

Andresen

Caputi

Oades

2010

Psychiatry Research

188

163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is an international call for mental health services to become recovery-oriented, and also to use evidence based practices. Addressing this call requires recovery-oriented measurement of outcomes and service evaluation.Mental health consumers view recovery as leading as meaningful life, and have criticised traditional clinical measures for being too disability-oriented. This study compares three measures of consumer-defined recovery fromenduring mental illness: the Recovery Assessment Scale, the Mental Health Recovery Measure and the Self-Identified Stage of Recovery, with four conventional clinical measures. Correlational analyses supported the convergent validity of the recovery measures, although certain subscaleswere unrelated to each other. More importantly, little relationship was found between consumer-defined recovery and the clinical measures. Analyses of variance revealed that scores on the recovery measures increased across self-identified stage of recovery, but scores onmost clinicalmeasures did not improve consistently across stage of recovery. The findings demonstrate the qualitative difference between the two types of measures, supporting the claim by consumers that clinical measures do not assess important aspects of recovery. There is a need for further research and refinement of recovery measurement, including assessment of stages of recovery, with the aimof including such measures as an adjunct in routine clinical assessment, service evaluation and research. © 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do clinical outcome measures assess consumer-defined recovery?

Andresen

Caputi

Oades

2010

Psychiatry Research

188

163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Deficits in executive functioning are ubiquitous in this population (Barch et al, 2001;Barch & Smith, 2008;Elvevåg & Goldberg, 2000;Velligan & Bow-Thomas, 1999), with several studies reporting that people with schizophrenia show reliable differences from healthy controls on traditional neuropsychological tests of planning (Morice & Delahunty, 1996;Morris, Rushe, Woodruffe, & Murray, 1995;Staal, Hijman, Hulshoff, & Kahn, 2000). The extant literature also shows that cognitive deficits in schizophrenia are associated with reduced everyday functioning (Evans et al, 2003;Harvey, Green, Keefe, & Velligan, 2004;Kessler, Giovannetti, & MacMullen, 2007;Klapow et al, 1997;Patterson et al, 1998;Patterson, Goldman, McKibbin, Hughs, & Jeste, 2001;Semkovska, Bedard, Godbout, Limoge, & Stip, 2004;Semkovska, Stip, Godbout, Paquet, & Bedard, 2002;Sevy & Davidson, 1995;Velligan et al, 2007). However, the link between planning deficits and everyday functioning in schizophrenia has not been extensively studied.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Everyday action planning in schizophrenia

Seter¹,

Giovannetti²,

Kessler³

et al. 2011

Neuropsychological Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Planning of everyday tasks was examined in 48 inpatients with schizophrenia and 26 healthy controls. Participants were administered the Naturalistic Action Test, which requires completion of three everyday tasks (e.g., make toast and coffee). Planning variables, including planning behaviours (e.g., gathering items before engaging in a subtask) and planning time (e.g., period between task instructions and first action) were coded to evaluate forward thinking in these tasks. Results showed that planning variables were reliably coded. Controls demonstrated more planning behaviours than participants with schizophrenia; however, this difference was accounted for by education. People with schizophrenia spent significantly less time planning when planning time was analysed as a proportion of the total time on tasks. Planning variables were related to the ability to accomplish everyday task steps and to perform everyday task steps accurately. Together these findings suggest that rehabilitation strategies that emphasise both planning time and planning behaviours may facilitate everyday functioning in people with schizophrenia.

show abstract

“…4,7 The original intent of requiring a coprimary endpoint was to help protect the public from possible claims that testing of a new cognitive agent might result in statistically significant but clinically insignificant changes in the patient's real-world functioning. In the MATRICS-Validation of Intermediate Measures (VIM) 7 study, the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) Performance-based Skills Assessment (UPSA) 8 and the Test of Adaptive Behavior in Schizophrenia (TABS) 9 were regarded as strong coprimary endpoints because they demonstrated robust correlations (r's = .67 and .61, respectively) with the MCCB. 10 However, like the MCCB, the UPSA and TABS are performance-based measures of cognition, but with the added feature of including some aspects of 'real-world' relevance, such as questions on how to read a bus map.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Cognitive Assessment Interview (CAI): Reliability and Validity of a Brief Interview-Based Measure of Cognition

Ventura

Reise

Keefe

et al. 2012

Schizophrenia Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To obtain Food and Drug Administration approval for the treatment of cognitive impairments associated with schizophrenia, a drug will need to demonstrate benefits beyond those that may be documented on objective cognitive tests. Interview-based measures of cognition such as the Cognitive Assessment Interview (CAI) are candidate coprimary outcome measures. Methods: Psychiatrically stable schizophrenia outpatients (n 5 150) were studied using the CAI to obtain information about cognitive functioning from both the patient and an informant. Patients also received objective assessments of neurocognition, functional capacity, functional outcome, and symptoms, at baseline and 1 month later. Results: The CAI had good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 5 .92) and good test-retest reliability (r 5 .83). The CAI was moderately correlated with objective neurocognitive test scores (r's 5 2.39 to 2.41) and moderately correlated with social functioning (r 5 2.38), work functioning (r 5 2.48), and overall functional outcome (r 5 2.49). The correlations of CAI scores with external validity indicators did not differ significantly by source of information (patient alone ratings were valid). Overall functional outcome correlated more strongly with patient CAI scores (r 5 2.50) than with objective neurocognitive test scores (r 5 .29) or functional capacity (r 5 .29). Conclusions: Field testing of the CAI produced reliable ratings of cognitive functioning that were correlated with functional outcome. Patient ratings alone yielded scores with reliability and validity values appropriate for use in clinical trials. The CAI appears to provide useful complementary information and possesses practical advantages for rating cognitive functioning including an interview-based method of administration, brief assessment time (15 min for the patient assessment), little or no practice effects, and ease of scoring.Key words: schizophrenia/functional outcome/functional capacity/symptoms/informant ratings/neurocognition IntroductionEvidence continues to accrue indicating that cognitive deficits are pronounced in schizophrenia and that those deficits impinge on a patient's quality of life and ability to function on a daily basis. Traditionally, objective tests have been used to assess cognition. But the assessment of cognitive functioning might benefit from nonperformance-based person-oriented assessments. Assessing cognitive functioning through interview-based methods is practical and might enable the examination of the impact of cognition on daily functioning. Interview-based measures of cognitive functioning are already in the second generation of development, following Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance on the development of methods for assessing patient reported outcomes.1-3 The assessment protocol for the Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (MATRICS) initiative included both of the first-generation instruments, the Schizophrenia Cognition Rating Scale (SCoRS) 2 and the Clinical Global ...

show abstract

The reliability and validity of the Test of Adaptive Behavior in Schizophrenia (TABS)

Cited by 47 publications

References 21 publications

Do clinical outcome measures assess consumer-defined recovery?

Do clinical outcome measures assess consumer-defined recovery?

Everyday action planning in schizophrenia

The Cognitive Assessment Interview (CAI): Reliability and Validity of a Brief Interview-Based Measure of Cognition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About