Validation of Victoria Symptom Validity Test Cutoff Scores among Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Litigants Using a Known-Groups Design

• Published in: Archives of clinical neuropsychology Vol. 31; no. 3; pp. 231 - 245
• Main Authors: Silk-Eglit, Graham M, Lynch, Julie K, McCaffrey, Robert J
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01.05.2016
• Subjects: Adult; Brain Injuries, Traumatic - complications; Brain Injuries, Traumatic - diagnosis; Chi-Square Distribution; Female; Humans; Male; Malingering - diagnosis; Middle Aged; Neuropsychological Tests; Psychology, Clinical; Reproducibility of Results; Sensitivity and Specificity; Forensic neuropsychology; Traumatic brain injury; Head injury; Malingering/symptom validity testing
• ISSN: 0887-6177; 1873-5843
• DOI: 10.1093/arclin/acv108

The Victoria Symptom Validity Test (VSVT) is one of the most accurate performance validity tests. Previous research has recommended several cutoffs for performance invalidity classification on the VSVT. However, only one of these studies used a known groups design and no study has investigated these cutoffs in an exclusively mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) medico-legal sample. The current study used a known groups design to validate VSVT cutoffs among mild traumatic brain injury litigants and explored the best approach for using the multiple recommended cutoffs for this test. Cutoffs of <18 Hard items correct, <41 Total items correct, an Easy - Hard items correct difference >6, and <5 items correct on any block yielded the strongest classification accuracy. Using multiple cutoffs in conjunction reduced classification accuracy. Given convergence across studies, a cutoff of <18 Hard items correct is the most appropriate for use with mTBI litigants.