Wait, There'S A Baby In This Bath Water! Update On Quantitative And Qualitative Cut-Offs For Rey 15-Item Recall And Recognition

Objective: Evaluate the effectiveness of Rey 15-item plus recognition data in a large neuropsychological sample.Method: Rey 15-item plus recognition scores were compared in credible (n = 138) and noncredible (n = 353) neuropsychology referrals.Results: Noncredible patients scored significantly worse than credible patients on all Rey 15-item plus recognition scores. When cut-offs were selected to maintain at least 89.9% specificity, cut-offs could be made more stringent, with the highest sensitivity found for recognition correct (cut-off <= 11; 62.6% sensitivity) and the combination score (recall + recognition - false positives; cut-off <= 22; 60.6% sensitivity), followed by recall correct (cut-off <= 11; 49.3% sensitivity), and recognition false positive errors (>= 3; 17.9% sensitivity). A cut-off of >= 4 applied to a summed qualitative error score for the recall trial resulted in 19.4% sensitivity. Approximately 10% of credible subjects failed either recall correct or recognition correct, whereas two-thirds of noncredible patients (67.7%) showed this pattern. Thirteen percent of credible patients failed either recall correct, recognition correct, or the recall qualitative error score, whereas nearly 70% of noncredible patients failed at least one of the three. Some individual qualitative recognition errors had low false positive rates (<2%) indicating that their presence was virtually pathognomonic for noncredible performance. Older age (>50) and IQ < 80 were associated with increased false positive rates in credible patients.Conclusions: Data on a larger sample than that available in the 2002 validation study show that Rey 15-item plus recognition cut-offs can be made more stringent, and thereby detect up to 70% of noncredible test takers, but the test should be used cautiously in older individuals and in individuals with lowered IQ.