Q interactive for neuropsych testing

[BrainStormer]

I am wondering if any testing folks know if tests like the NAB Naming, COWAT, Trails A & B, various PVTs (TOMM, Dot Counting, Word Choice), or Rey Complex Figure Test will ever be an option on q interactive? My hope is that eventually the majority, if not all, tests can be made available on that platform. I know there are limitations including licensing rights and digitalizing tests that have a psychomotor component but was curious if anyone knows Pearson's plans to expand their test bank on q interactive.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[PsyDr]

The day that happens, is the day our profession is all over.

No qualitative admin notes, automated scoring, automated interpretation, master's level access, master's level reimbursement, then teacher admin, and none of us get paid.

 

[WisNeuro]

I am wondering if any testing folks know if tests like the NAB Naming, COWAT, Trails A & B, various PVTs (TOMM, Dot Counting, Word Choice), or Rey Complex Figure Test will ever be an option on q interactive? My hope is that eventually the majority, if not all, tests can be made available on that platform. I know there are limitations including licensing rights and digitalizing tests that have a psychomotor component but was curious if anyone knows Pearson's plans to expand their test bank on q interactive.

Why would I want to pay Pearson for forms of tests that are freely available? Also, they don't own a good deal of the tests I use regularly anyway. I really don't want to juggle three separate platforms, a handful of subscription services, and recurrent software issues just to do a simple dementia eval. Additionally, in terms of IME/forensic work, I don't want to administer anything wherein I cannot control the data and double check the scoring. Pearson has been going the way of blackboxing some of this.

OC: "Dr, how did you arrive at a determination of the claimant's current cognitive status"

ME: "The tablet told me that's what it was."

 

[WisNeuro]

To add on to this, does anyone remember when the CVLT-II scoring software had a significant error that wasn't fixed for some time? Especially in the VA system where updates cannot be automatically pushed? I do.

 

[borne_before]

To add on to this, does anyone remember when the CVLT-II scoring software had a significant error that wasn't fixed for some time? Especially in the VA system where updates cannot be automatically pushed? I do.

Just recently that really goofed implementation of picture span and didn't re-norm it on ipads.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

They are playing fast and loose w equivalency too. Going to digital is a big mistake. I’ll never use them bc “Trust Me Bro!” is not sufficient.

 

[BrainStormer]

I don't want to administer anything wherein I cannot control the data and double check the scoring. Pearson has been going the way of blackboxing some of this.

This is a good point. I do wonder if Pearson will be addressing this in the near future.

 

[quickpsych]

As others have pointed out, this is probably not a great idea. I'd be especially be concerned about PVTS and SVTs. Sure a lot of portions of these tests are floating around online with forums telling people how to "game" them; imagine remote testing of these and how out of control that could get. Also how would some of these even be completed accurately, on things like Trails and Rey, how do you know the software, the hardware, and the inputs are tracking accurately?

And honestly I used to briefly be more gung-ho and open to more remote testing or digital only testing BUT more and more I think if I ever started my own practice, I would have everything completed in person in one or two sessions, even things like questionnaires. Some leeway for observer/parent/partner/teacher questionnaires obviously but the rest, either paper or sit down in my office with my tablet or my laptop and they take it in a controlled setting. No distractions, less risk of theft/leak of test data like photos or copies, less risk of someone else having input, pressure, or a hand in completing it. Plus the value of observations.

Sure there are security measures that places like Pearson Vue do for standardized testing centers when offering remote testing but even that is vulnerable to problems and requires much more equipment, software, and even staff to monitor in real time to ensure the security of the test administration.

 

[BrainStormer]

They are playing fast and loose w equivalency too. Going to digital is a big mistake. I’ll never use them bc “Trust Me Bro!” is not sufficient.

I was at a conference a few months back and attended the new DKEFS advanced lecture. If I recall correctly, the new DKEFS Advanced is expected to be available exclusively on Q-interactive for administration - at least initially. Though I believe the manual will still be made available as digital or paper copy. It will be interesting to see how the field changes as more tests go digital.

 

[PsyDr]

Why would I want to pay Pearson for forms of tests that are freely available? Also, they don't own a good deal of the tests I use regularly anyway. I really don't want to juggle three separate platforms, a handful of subscription services, and recurrent software issues just to do a simple dementia eval. Additionally, in terms of IME/forensic work, I don't want to administer anything wherein I cannot control the data and double check the scoring. Pearson has been going the way of blackboxing some of this.

OC: "Dr, how did you arrive at a determination of the claimant's current cognitive status"

ME: "The tablet told me that's what it was."

If they make money by selling test administrations, it is reasonable that they will want to expand the scope of who can administer their tests. If teachers could hand every kid a tablet that "administers a NEPSY/WISC/WRAT", then the publishers could sell test admins to literally every student in America.

Pearson is already selling textbooks to most schools in the USA. It's not a stretch for them to try to expand those contracts. "We can reduce your costs by providing all school psych services for less than you’re paying staff!”.

 

[WisNeuro]

This is a good point. I do wonder if Pearson will be addressing this in the near future.

The only way that they are going to address this, is by making more of their scoring blackboxed. The business strategy is to move away from paper based admin and forcing a per virtual admin unit and/or subscription model. This is not a secret. They've been saying this for a while.

If they make money by selling test administrations, it is reasonable that they will want to expand the scope of who can administer their tests. If teachers could hand every kid a tablet that "administers a NEPSY/WISC/WRAT", then the publishers could sell test admins to literally every student in America.

Pearson is already selling textbooks to most schools in the USA. It's not a stretch for them to try to expand those contracts. "We can reduce your costs by providing all school psych services for less than you’re paying staff!”.

Yep. And part of the reason, I suspect, they don't take a strong stance in raw data to unqualified people court cases.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

BINGO!

Always follow the money....

 

[R. Matey]

If they make money by selling test administrations, it is reasonable that they will want to expand the scope of who can administer their tests. If teachers could hand every kid a tablet that "administers a NEPSY/WISC/WRAT", then the publishers could sell test admins to literally every student in America.

I'm 100% certain that something like this would be the eventual goal. Upload teacher and parent questionnaires along with test data, have AI write a realistic looking report and boom, a profession "disrupted."