TY - JOUR
T1 - Validity of cognitive screens for HIV-associated neurocognitive disorder
T2 - a systematic review and an informed screen selection guide
AU - Kamminga, Jody
AU - Cysique, Lucette A.
AU - Lu, Grace
AU - Batchelor, Jennifer
AU - Brew, Bruce J.
N1 - Copyright the Author(s) 2013. Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.
PY - 2013/12
Y1 - 2013/12
N2 - Various screening tools have been proposed to identify HIV-Associated Neurocognitive Disorder (HAND). However, there has been no systematic review of their strengths and weaknesses in detecting HAND when compared to gold standard neuropsychological testing. Thirty-five studies assessing HAND screens that were conducted in the era of combination antiretroviral therapy were retrieved using standard search procedures. Of those, 19 (54 %) compared their screen to standard neuropsychological testing. Studies were characterised by a wide variation in criterion validity primarily due to non-standard definition of neurocognitive impairment, and to the demographic and clinical heterogeneity of samples. Assessment of construct validity was lacking, and longitudinal useability was not established. To address these limitations, the current review proposed a summary of the most sensitive and specific studies (>70 %), as well as providing explicit caution regarding their weaknesses, and recommendations for their use in HIV primary care settings.
AB - Various screening tools have been proposed to identify HIV-Associated Neurocognitive Disorder (HAND). However, there has been no systematic review of their strengths and weaknesses in detecting HAND when compared to gold standard neuropsychological testing. Thirty-five studies assessing HAND screens that were conducted in the era of combination antiretroviral therapy were retrieved using standard search procedures. Of those, 19 (54 %) compared their screen to standard neuropsychological testing. Studies were characterised by a wide variation in criterion validity primarily due to non-standard definition of neurocognitive impairment, and to the demographic and clinical heterogeneity of samples. Assessment of construct validity was lacking, and longitudinal useability was not established. To address these limitations, the current review proposed a summary of the most sensitive and specific studies (>70 %), as well as providing explicit caution regarding their weaknesses, and recommendations for their use in HIV primary care settings.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84891125183&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11904-013-0176-6
DO - 10.1007/s11904-013-0176-6
M3 - Review article
C2 - 24072534
AN - SCOPUS:84891125183
SN - 1548-3568
VL - 10
SP - 342
EP - 355
JO - Current HIV/AIDS Reports
JF - Current HIV/AIDS Reports
IS - 4
ER -