Detecting feigned ADHD in college students using the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF).

Objective: To investigate the utility of the validity scales of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) for detecting feigned Attention-Deficit Hyperreactivity Disorder (ADHD), we utilized a simulation design. Method: We examined group differences across the Restructured Clinical (RC) and validity scales as well as the classification ability of the validity scales across three cut scores. Analyses were conducted across five simulation groups (N = 177) and a standard instruction group (N = 32). Results: Across most of the RC and validity scales, those feigning ADHD produced significantly higher scores than the standard instruction group, but generally no significant differences between the feigning groups were demonstrated. The most promising scales for detecting feigned ADHD were F-r, Fp-r, and Fs at cut scores in the 70 T to 80 T range, respectively. Conclusions: Results support the use of the MMPI-2-RF in ADHD evaluations with scores on F-r, Fs, and Fp-r being particularly useful in detecting feigned ADHD in college students. However, there was no evidence to support the feigning of distinct ADHD symptoms presentations.

Long-Term Neurocognitive Outcomes of Spring-Assisted Surgery versus Cranial Vault Remodeling for Sagittal Synostosis.

BACKGROUND: A long-term neurocognitive comparison of patients with sagittal synostosis who underwent spring-assisted surgery or cranial vault remodeling has not been performed. METHODS: Patients with sagittal synostosis who underwent spring-assisted surgery or cranial vault remodeling were recruited from Wake Forest School of Medicine and Yale School of Medicine, respectively. Cognitive tests administered included an abbreviated intelligence quotient, academic achievement, and visuomotor integration. An analysis of covariance model compared cohorts controlling for demographic variables. RESULTS: Thirty-nine spring-assisted surgery and 36 cranial vault remodeling patients were included in the study. No significant differences between cohorts were found with respect to age at surgery, sex, race, birth weight, family income, or parental education. The cranial vault cohort had significantly older parental age (p < 0.001), and mean age at testing for the spring cohort was significantly higher (p = 0.001). After adjusting for covariates, the cranial vault cohort had significantly higher verbal intelligence quotient (116.5 versus 104.3; p = 0.0024), performance intelligence quotient (109.2 versus 101.5; p = 0.041), and full-scale intelligence quotient (114.3 versus 103.2; p = 0.0032). When included patients were limited to intelligence quotients from 80 to 120, the cranial vault cohort maintained higher verbal (108.0 versus 100.4; p = 0.036), performance (104.5 versus 97.7; p = 0.016), and full-scale (107.6 versus 101.5; p = 0.038) intelligence quotients. The cranial vault cohort had higher visuomotor integration scores than the surgery group (111.1 versus 98.1; p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in academic achievement. CONCLUSIONS: Sagittal synostosis patients who underwent cranial vault remodeling had higher intelligence quotient and visuomotor integration scores. There were no differences in academic achievement. Both cohorts had intelligence quotient scores at or above the normal range. Further studies are warranted to identify factors that may contribute to cognitive outcome differences. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, II.

Spring-Assisted Strip Craniectomy Versus Cranial Vault Remodeling: Long-Term Psychological, Behavioral, and Executive Function Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists regarding the optimal surgical approach for non-syndromic sagittal synostosis. This study provides the first comparative analysis of the long-term behavioral, psychological, and executive function outcomes for patients who underwent either cranial vault remodeling (CVR) or spring-assisted strip craniectomy (SAS). METHODS: Thirty-six CVR patients and 39 SAS patients were evaluated. Parents and caregivers completed the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) and the Behavior Assessment System for Children, Second Edition (BASC-2) to evaluate behavioral, emotional, social, adaptive, and executive functioning skills. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the CVR and the SAS groups (P > 0.05) in any of the BRIEF areas of function. Furthermore, the BASC-2 battery illustrated no significant differences in all areas analyzed except one. Among the 2 groups, the CVR group was rated as having fewer social withdrawal symptoms on the BASC-2 (47.00 ±â€Š10.27) compared to the SAS cohort (54.64 ±â€Š10.96), F = 6.79, P = 0.012, Cohen d = 0.688. However, both means were still within the normal range. CONCLUSIONS: Children undergoing SAS and CVR procedures for isolated sagittal synostosis were not rated as having clinically significant behavioral, emotional, social, adaptive, or executive functioning problems on parental forms.

Effort in college undergraduates is sufficient on the word memory test.

A prior report found unusually high rates of performance validity test (PVT) failure in undergraduate research participants (31%-56%). The present study examined 110 undergraduate volunteers in three conditions (positive, neutral, or negative demand characteristics) in either an easy to hard or a hard to easy progression of neuropsychological tests using the Word Memory Test PVT. Neither demand characteristics nor test order had a substantial effect on test performance, and only a 6.4% failure rate was found on the PVT. These results suggest that neuropsychological testing experiments are completed faithfully by the vast majority of college undergraduates, although excluding the small number of participants failing PVTs would strengthen the internal validity of most studies.