期刊名称：Revue de Neuropsychologie Neurosciences Cognitives et Cliniques
印刷版ISSN：2101-6739
电子版ISSN：2102-6025
出版年度：2016
卷号：8
期号：1
页码：61-69
DOI：10.1684/nrp.2016.0365
出版社：John Libbey Eurotext
摘要：Tables Authors Françoise Colombo 1 * Hélène Amieva 2 Thierry Lecerf 3 Vincent Verdon 4 1 Hôpital Fribourgeois, Unité de neuropsychologie, chemin des Pensionnats 2, 1708 Fribourg, Suisse 2 Inserm U1219 Bordeaux Population Health Center, Université de Bordeaux, 33076 Bordeaux, France 3 Université de Genève et formation universitaire à distance, Faculté de psychologie et des sciences de l’éducation, Bd du Pont d’Arve 40, 1211 Genève 4, Suisse 4 Hôpital Neuchâtelois, Unité de neuropsychologie et logopédie, rue de la Maladière 45, 2000 Neuchâtel, Suisse * Correspondance Key words: norm, normality, diagnostic, validity/fidelity, pathology DOI : 10.1684/nrp.2016.0365 Page(s) : 61-9 Published in: 2016 The procedure consisting in comparing the individual's test score to a norm group has become the standard in the field of clinical neuropsychology, sometimes to the detriment of a clinical approach. Given the numerous tools of assessment available for clinicians, it is particularly important to precisely understand what underlies the concept of norms in order to adequately use them in clinical practice, without suffering their tyranny. To this end, we organized a workshop involving different experts on this topic. The present article is the fruit of their thoughts and advances some keys to a better understanding of this concept. First, we present considerations on what are “normal scores”, as opposed to “pathological scores”, and discuss the issue of comparative and diagnostic norms, as well as the use of quantiles or means. We remind the reader that a norm is established for a given population and has a specific purpose. Regarding the tests themselves, their developments require specific criteria, and the discussion is oriented towards the criteria of validity and fidelity, which importance is sometimes poorly understood and often neglected. Finally, the diversity of norms applied to widely used tests is addressed. We present the outcome of a reflection group constituted of specialists in clinical neuropsychology, attempting to define common criteria for specific tests in order to offer uniform decision criteria for a given pathological status in a given population.
Loading...
