- Joined
- Feb 15, 2009
- Messages
- 18,021
- Reaction score
- 23,761
I think T4C had a Houston Conference thread a few years back, but we've had some questions recently, so I thought I'd post again, with some added info.
Houston conference Guidelines. This outlines what we are as neuropsychologists, what we should know, and a bit about how we should be trained (in grad school, internship, and postdoc). If you want to be a neuropsychologist, this is essential. This profession is very involved in making sure people that are not trained in neuropsychology are not doing neuropsychological assessments.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct..._cIokRT_7IP3c-86Q&sig2=WiO1TFIMQo2SucILKmqrSA
AACN's Practice Guidelines. Builds on the HC guidelines, but goes into much more detail about the practice of neuropsych in a career setting.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13825580601025932
Ethical References for Neuropsychologists. We run into some different conundrums in the practice of neuropsychology, here is a handy list of references you should keep on hand and add to as newer literature comes out.
http://www.theaacn.org/userdocuments/np_ethics_references_(feb2014).pdf
Consensus Statement on Use of Effort and Symptom Validity Testing. If you don't believe in the use of these instruments, just get out, right now. This is big in the field, you need to know these instruments, including their strengths and weaknesses. You should also know a good deal about such concepts as sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, OR, etc.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13854040903155063
Board Certification in Neuropsychology. This is becoming a necessity in the field. Without it, you limit yourself significantly in the career world, and in some jurisdictions, you can not bill for neuropsychological services without it. This will only become more common as time goes on. This is something that all specialties in psych should strive towards. We need more stringent standards of practice if we want to be taken seriously. This is good for us as practitioners. But more importantly, it is good for our patients, the consumers, who will have more faith in the competency of their practitioner. Period.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13854040902802947
That's it for now, I'll add more as I think about important resources, but this is a good start.
Houston conference Guidelines. This outlines what we are as neuropsychologists, what we should know, and a bit about how we should be trained (in grad school, internship, and postdoc). If you want to be a neuropsychologist, this is essential. This profession is very involved in making sure people that are not trained in neuropsychology are not doing neuropsychological assessments.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct..._cIokRT_7IP3c-86Q&sig2=WiO1TFIMQo2SucILKmqrSA
AACN's Practice Guidelines. Builds on the HC guidelines, but goes into much more detail about the practice of neuropsych in a career setting.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13825580601025932
Ethical References for Neuropsychologists. We run into some different conundrums in the practice of neuropsychology, here is a handy list of references you should keep on hand and add to as newer literature comes out.
http://www.theaacn.org/userdocuments/np_ethics_references_(feb2014).pdf
Consensus Statement on Use of Effort and Symptom Validity Testing. If you don't believe in the use of these instruments, just get out, right now. This is big in the field, you need to know these instruments, including their strengths and weaknesses. You should also know a good deal about such concepts as sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, OR, etc.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13854040903155063
Board Certification in Neuropsychology. This is becoming a necessity in the field. Without it, you limit yourself significantly in the career world, and in some jurisdictions, you can not bill for neuropsychological services without it. This will only become more common as time goes on. This is something that all specialties in psych should strive towards. We need more stringent standards of practice if we want to be taken seriously. This is good for us as practitioners. But more importantly, it is good for our patients, the consumers, who will have more faith in the competency of their practitioner. Period.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13854040902802947
That's it for now, I'll add more as I think about important resources, but this is a good start.
Last edited:
