Measuring Psychological Inflexibility of Suicidal Thoughts: The Acceptance and Action Questionnaire for Suicidal Ideation (AAQ-SI)

Cognitive Therapy and Research - Despite interest in psychological inflexibility as a marker of suicide risk, no measure of psychological inflexibility specific to SI exists. The present study...     

Education Outcomes of Children Born Late Preterm: A Retrospective Whole-Population Cohort Study

Maternal and Child Health Journal - Early life exposures can have an impact on a child’s developmental trajectory and children born late preterm (34–36 weeks gestational age)...     

Differentiating poor validity from probable impairment on the medical symptom validity test: a cross-validation study

Aims: In neuropsychological evaluations, it is often difficult to ascertain whether poor performance on measures of validity is due to poor effort or malingering, or whether there is genuine cognitive impairment. Dunham and Denney created an algorithm to assess this question using the Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT). We assessed the ability of their algorithm to detect poor validity versus probable impairment, and concordance of failure on the MSVT with other freestanding tests of performance validity.

Methods: Two previously published datasets (n?=?153 and n?=?641, respectively) from outpatient neuropsychological evaluations were used to test Dunham and Denney’s algorithm, and to assess concordance of failure rates with the Test of Memory Malingering and the forced choice measure of the California Verbal Learning Test, two commonly used performance validity tests.

Results: In both datasets, none of the four cutoff scores for failure on the MSVT (70%, 75%, 80%, or 85%) identified a poor validity group with proportionally aligned failure rates on other freestanding measures of performance validity. Additionally, the protocols with probable impairment did not differ from those with poor validity on cognitive measures.

Conclusions: Despite what appeared to be a promising approach to evaluating failure on the easy MSVT subtests when clinical data are unavailable (as recommended in the advanced interpretation program, or advanced interpretation [AI], of the MSVT), the current findings indicate the AI remains the gold standard for doing so. Future research should build on this effort to address shortcomings in measures of effort in neuropsychological evaluations.     

Secretion,blood levels and cutaneous expression of TL1A in psoriasis patients

TL1A is a TNF‐like cytokine which has been shown to co‐stimulate TH1 and TH17 responses during chronic inflammation. The expression of this novel cytokine has been investigated in inflammatory disorders like rheumatoid arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease, but little is known about expression and induction in psoriasis. Indeed, the pathogenesis in psoriasis is still not fully understood and it is speculated that cytokines other than TNF‐α are important in subsets of patients. Also, for patients with severe disease that are treated with systemic anti‐TNF‐α blockade, novel candidates to be used as disease and response biomarkers are of high interest. Here, we demonstrate TL1A expression in biopsies from psoriatic lesions. Also, we investigated spontaneous and induced TL1A secretion from PBMCs and blood levels from a cohort of psoriasis patients. Here, increased spontaneous secretion from PBMCs was observed as compared to healthy controls and a small subset of patients had highly elevated TL1A in the blood. Interestingly, activation of PBMCs with various cytokines showed a decreased sensitivity for TL1A activation in psoriasis patients compared to healthy controls.TL1A levels in blood and biopsies could not be correlated with disease activity with this patient cohort. Thus, additional large‐scale studies are warranted to investigate TL1A as a biomarker.