The MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery, part 2: co-norming and standardization.

OBJECTIVE The consensus cognitive battery developed by the National Institute of Mental Health's (NIMH's) Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (MATRICS) initiative includes 10 independently developed tests that are recommended as the standard battery for clinical trials of cognition-enhancing interventions for schizophrenia. To facilitate interpretation of results from the MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery using a common scaling across tests, normative data were obtained from a single representative U.S. community sample with the battery administered as a unit. METHOD The MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery was administered to 300 individuals from the general community at five sites in differing geographic regions. For each site, recruitment was stratified by age, gender, and education. A scientific survey sampling method was used to help avoid sampling bias. The battery was administered in a standard order to each participant in a single session lasting approximately 60 minutes. Descriptive data were generated, and age, gender, and education effects on performance were examined. RESULTS Prominent age and education effects were observed across tests. The results for gender differed by measure, suggesting the need for age and gender corrections in clinical trials. The MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery components were co-normed, with allowance for demographic corrections. CONCLUSIONS Co-norming a battery such as the MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery, comprising tests from independent test developers each with their own set of norms, facilitates valid interpretation of test scores and communication of findings across studies. These normative data will aid in estimating the magnitude of change during clinical trials of cognition-enhancing agents and make it possible to derive more directly interpretable composite scores.

[1]  Michael F. Green,et al.  The MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery, part 1: test selection, reliability, and validity. , 2008, The American journal of psychiatry.

[2]  Ken P Kleinman,et al.  Much Ado About Nothing , 2007, The American statistician.

[3]  F. Craik,et al.  Cognition through the lifespan: mechanisms of change , 2006, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[4]  E. Russell,et al.  The fundamental psychometric status of neuropsychological batteries. , 2005, Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists.

[5]  Michael F. Green,et al.  The MATRICS initiative: developing a consensus cognitive battery for clinical trials , 2004, Schizophrenia Research.

[6]  W. Fenton,et al.  Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia: NIMH MATRICS initiative to support the development of agents for improving cognition in schizophrenia , 2004, Schizophrenia Research.

[7]  Michael F. Green,et al.  NIMH-MATRICS survey on assessment of neurocognition in schizophrenia , 2004, Schizophrenia Research.

[8]  Michael F. Green,et al.  Identification of separable cognitive factors in schizophrenia , 2004, Schizophrenia Research.

[9]  M. Appelbaum,et al.  Rohling's Interpretive Method and Inherent Limitations on the Flexibility of “Flexible Batteries” , 2004, Neuropsychology Review.

[10]  Michael F. Green,et al.  Approaching a consensus cognitive battery for clinical trials in schizophrenia: The NIMH-MATRICS conference to select cognitive domains and test criteria , 2004, Biological Psychiatry.

[11]  Larry R Price,et al.  The joint WAIS-III and WMS-III factor structure: development and cross-validation of a six-factor model of cognitive functioning. , 2003, Psychological assessment.

[12]  P. Moberg,et al.  Ten-Year Follow-up Survey of Clinical Neuropsychologists: Part II. Private Practice and Economics , 2000, The Clinical neuropsychologist.

[13]  I. Grant,et al.  Further crossvalidation of regression-based neuropsychological norms with an update for the Boston Naming Test. , 1999, Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology.

[14]  S. Bowden,et al.  Which tests do neuropsychologists use? , 1997, Journal of clinical psychology.

[15]  T. Goldberg,et al.  Auditory working memory and Wisconsin Card Sorting Test performance in schizophrenia. , 1997, Archives of general psychiatry.

[16]  S. Faraone,et al.  Neuropsychological functioning among the nonpsychotic relatives of schizophrenic patients: a diagnostic efficiency analysis. , 1995, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[17]  K. Schaie.  The course of adult intellectual development. , 1994, The American psychologist.

[18]  N. Risch,et al.  The continuous performance test, identical pairs version (CPT-IP): I. new findings about sustained attention in normal families , 1988, Psychiatry Research.

[19]  M. H. Brown,et al.  Sex differences in intelligence. , 1955, Journal of clinical psychology.

[20]  O. Spreen,et al.  Comprar A Compendium of Neuropsychological Tests - Administration, Norms, and Commentary | Esther Strauss | 9780195159578 | Oxford University Press , 2009 .

[21]  P. Salovey,et al.  Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) Users Manual , 2002 .

[22]  O. Spreen,et al.  A Compendium of Neuropsychological Tests: Administration, Norms, and Commentary , 1991 .