Equivalency of In-Person Versus Remote Assessment: WISC-V and KTEA-3 Performance in Clinically Referred Children and Adolescents.

OBJECTIVE: Teletesting has the potential to reduce numerous barriers to patient care which have only become exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although telehealth is commonly utilized throughout medicine and mental health practices, teletesting has remained limited within cognitive and academic evaluations. This may be largely due to concern for the validity of test administration via remote assessment. This cross-sectional study examined the equivalency of cognitive [Wechsler Intelligence Scales for Children - Fifth Edition (WISC-V)] and academic [Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement - Third Edition (KTEA-3)] subtests administered via either teletesting or traditional in-person testing within clinically referred youth. METHOD: Chart review using a retrospective, cross-sectional design included a total of 893 children and adolescents, ranging from 4 to 17 years (Mean age = 10.2 years, SD = 2.9 years) who were administered at least one subtest from the aforementioned cognitive or academic assessments. Of these, 285 received teletesting, with the remaining (n = 608) receiving in-person assessment. A total of seven subtests (five from the WISC-V and two from the KTEA-3) were examined. A series of inverse probability of exposure weighted (IPEW) linear regression models examined differences between groups for each of the seven subtests after adjustment for numerous demographic, diagnostic, and parent-reported symptom variables. RESULTS: Only two significant differences were found, such that WISC-V Visual Puzzles (p < .01) and KTEA-3 Math Concepts (p = .03) scores were slightly higher in the teletesting versus in-person groups. However, these differences were quite small in magnitude (WISC-V Visual Puzzles, d = .33, KTEA-3 Math Concepts, d = .18). CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate equivalency across methods of service delivery without clinically meaningful differences in scores among referred pediatric patients.

Equivalence of remote, digital administration and traditional, in-person administration of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Fifth Edition (WISC-V).

Many children in need do not receive the psychoeducational evaluation services they need, with an estimated 15% of all students struggling with attentional or learning difficulties that are unassessed, and thus unaddressed, during "normal" times. Such evaluations have largely halted during the COVID-19 crisis, with questionable psychometrics of usable measures and clinicians largely unprepared to administer them. Remote, online psychoeducational evaluations have the potential to decrease this access problem by allowing for evaluations to continue during the crisis, as well as redistributing (geographically and potentially socioeconomically) evaluators to populations disproportionately without access. The present study evaluated the equivalence of a remote, online administration procedure for the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Fifth Edition (WISC-V) with traditional, in-person administration. Results revealed no significant differences-and, therefore, method effects-between the full-scale IQ and index scores between the administration procedures. One subtest did reveal a significant method effect, with children performing more poorly on the remote, online version of the test. Although imperfect, the remote, online procedure is a viable alternative for the traditional, in-person administration of the WISC-V, especially during this time of crisis. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).