Neuropsychological Assessment of Organic Solvent Effects in South Africa: Test Selection, Adaptation, Scoring, and Validation Issues

Nell, Victor; Myers, Jonathan E.; Colvin, Mark; Rees, D.

doi:10.1006/enrs.1993.1150

Cited by 21 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A recent review by Fasfous, Al-Joudi, Puente, and Perez-Garcia (2017) identified that, (Fasfous et al, 2017). Other efforts to develop normative standards outside of American and European cultures suggest comparability of the construct measured when normative standardizations and underlying issues of cultural validity are appropriately addressed (e.g., Zambia, Hestad et al, 2016, Kabula et al, 2017China, Gupta et al, 2014, Heaton et al, 2008, Shi et al, 2015Brazil, de Almeida, et al, 2013;India, Ghate et al, 2015, Kamat et al, 2012, Malda, van de Vijver, Srinivasan, Transler, & Sukumar, 2010Czech Republic, Bezdicek et al, 2012South Africa, Nell, 1999;Nell, Myers, Colvin, & Rees, 1994;Cameroon, Ruffieux, et al, 2010;South Korea, Ko, Rosen, Simpson, & Brown, 2014), although there are some exceptions (e.g., lexical fluency and block design in Cameroon, Ruffieux, et al, 2010).…”

Section: Cultural and International Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neuropsychological Assessment: Past and Future

Casaletto

Heaton

2017

J Int Neuropsychol Soc

141

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neuropsychological assessment tools are the staple of our field. The development of standardized metrics sensitive to brain-behavior relationships has shaped the neuropsychological questions we can ask, our understanding of discrete brain functions, and has informed the detection and treatment of neurological disorders. We identify key turning points and innovations in neuropsychological assessment over the past 40-50 years that highlight how the tools used in common practice today came to be. Also selected for emphasis are several exciting lines of research and novel approaches that are underway to further probe and characterize brain functions to enhance diagnostic and treatment outcomes. We provide a brief historical review of different clinical neuropsychological assessment approaches (Lurian, Flexible and Fixed Batteries, Boston Process Approach) and critical developments that have influenced their interpretation (normative standards, cultural considerations, longitudinal change, common metric batteries, and translational assessment constructs). Lastly, we discuss growing trends in assessment including technological advances, efforts to integrate neuropsychology across disciplines (e.g., primary care), and changes in neuropsychological assessment infrastructure. Neuropsychological assessment has undergone massive growth in the past several decades. Nonetheless, there remain many unanswered questions and future challenges to better support measurement tools and translate assessment findings into meaningful recommendations and treatments. As technology and our understanding of brain function advance, efforts to support infrastructure for both traditional and novel assessment approaches and integration of complementary brain assessment tools from other disciplines will be integral to inform brain health treatments and promote the growth of our field. (JINS, 2017, 23, 778-790)

show abstract

Section: Cultural and International Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neuropsychological Assessment: Past and Future

Casaletto

Heaton

2017

J Int Neuropsychol Soc

141

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Those tests were excluded because of poor performance in previous studies among South African workers with little education (Brown et al, 1991;Nell et al, 1993). Ad-…”

Section: Neurobehavioral Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, use of the Subjective Symptoms Questionnaire and the Profile of Mood States (from the WHO NCTB) was found to be of questionable validity in studies in China (Liang et al, 1990) and in South Africa (Brown et al, 1991;Nell et al, 1993) because the subjects found them unintelligible or they generated findings showing unexpected associations. Excessive sensitivity of standard neuropsychological batteries to cultural variables may mask effects of occupational chemical exposures that are smaller than effects resulting from educational differences (Myers et al, 1997).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Investigation into Neurologic and Neurobehavioral Effects of Long-Term Agrichemical Use among Deciduous Fruit Farm Workers in the Western Cape, South Africa

London

Myers

Nell

et al. 1997

Environmental Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A search of PubMed using the term “NCTB” in the title or the abstract revealed 46 publications (Cassitto et al 1989; Chen et al 1990; Yokoyama et al 1990; Waszkowska and Bazylewicz-Walczak 1992; Anger and Cassitto 1993; Anger et al 1993; Dudek and Bazylewicz-Walczak 1993; Lee and Lee 1993; Nell et al 1993; Reif et al 1993; Chia et al 1994; Yang et al 1994; Escalona et al 1995; Maizlish et al 1995; Tang et al 1995; Chia et al 1997; Liang et al 1997; London et al 1997; Niu et al 1998; Anger et al 2000; Cao et al 2000; Kang 2000; Niu et al 2000; Sun and Liang 2001; Shen et al 2002; Zhou et al 2002; He et al 2003; He et al 2003; Myers et al 2003; Reif et al 2003; Chia et al 2004; Mohamed and Nordin 2004; Niu et al 2004; Kim et al 2005; Young et al 2005; Yuan et al 2006; Chia et al 2007; Wang et al 2007; Zhou et al 2007; Nie et al 2008; Wang et al 2008; Gao et al 2010; Niu et al 2010; Zhang et al 2011; Li et al 2013; Qiu et al 2013). …”

Section: 1 Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconsideration of the WHO NCTB strategy and test selection

Anger

2014

NeuroToxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The World Health Organization-recommended Neurobehavioral Core Test Battery (NCTB) became the international standard for identifying adverse human behavioral effects due to neurotoxic chemical exposure when it was first proposed in 1983. Since then the WHO NCTB has been repeatedly cited as the basis for test selection in human neurotoxicology research. A Discussion Group was held before the International Symposium on Neurobehavioral Methods and effects in Occupational and Environmental Health to review the NCTB and reconsider it’s tests. The workshop made three consensus recommendations to the International Congress on Occupational Health (ICOH) Scientific Committee on Neurotoxicology and Psychophysiology (SCNP): a ‘screening’ battery of broadly sensitive tests is needed as guidance to the field of human neurotoxicologythe SCNP should convene a panel to reconsider the functions measured and the tests in the WHO NCTBThree disciplines should be represented in the panel recommending a revised NCTB: Neuropsychology; Experimental Psychology; Neurology This recommendation will be pursued at the next meeting of the International Congress on Occupational Health (ICOH) Scientific Committee on Neurotoxicology and Psychophysiology (SCNP).

show abstract

Neuropsychological Assessment of Organic Solvent Effects in South Africa: Test Selection, Adaptation, Scoring, and Validation Issues

Cited by 21 publications

References 11 publications

Neuropsychological Assessment: Past and Future

Neuropsychological Assessment: Past and Future

An Investigation into Neurologic and Neurobehavioral Effects of Long-Term Agrichemical Use among Deciduous Fruit Farm Workers in the Western Cape, South Africa

Reconsideration of the WHO NCTB strategy and test selection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About