The Clinical Neuropsychologist Journal Impact Factor & Information

Publisher: Taylor & Francis (Routledge)

Journal description

Current impact factor: 1.58

Impact Factor Rankings

2015 Impact Factor Available summer 2015
2013 / 2014 Impact Factor 1.583
2012 Impact Factor 1.678
2011 Impact Factor 2.115
2010 Impact Factor 2.075
2009 Impact Factor 1.766
2008 Impact Factor 1.75
2007 Impact Factor 1.716
2006 Impact Factor 1.279
2005 Impact Factor 1.143
2004 Impact Factor 1.162

Impact factor over time

Impact factor

Additional details

5-year impact 2.26
Cited half-life 8.90
Immediacy index 0.33
Eigenfactor 0.00
Article influence 0.67
Other titles Clinical neuropsychologist (Online), TCN
ISSN 1744-4144
OCLC 42679104
Material type Document, Periodical, Internet resource
Document type Internet Resource, Computer File, Journal / Magazine / Newspaper

Publisher details

Taylor & Francis (Routledge)

  • Pre-print
    • Author can archive a pre-print version
  • Post-print
    • Author can archive a post-print version
  • Conditions
    • Some individual journals may have policies prohibiting pre-print archiving
    • On author's personal website or departmental website immediately
    • On institutional repository or subject-based repository after either 12 months embargo
    • Publisher's version/PDF cannot be used
    • On a non-profit server
    • Published source must be acknowledged
    • Must link to publisher version
    • Set statements to accompany deposits (see policy)
    • The publisher will deposit in on behalf of authors to a designated institutional repository including PubMed Central, where a deposit agreement exists with the repository
    • STM: Science, Technology and Medicine
    • Publisher last contacted on 25/03/2014
    • This policy is an exception to the default policies of 'Taylor & Francis (Routledge)'
  • Classification
    ​ green

Publications in this journal

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Due to factors including differences in educational opportunity, African Americans and Caucasians frequently differ on cognitive tests creating diagnostic error risks. Such differences have been found on the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS), and preliminary norms based on a small sample of African Americans have been generated. In a larger sample of community-dwelling older African Americans, we explored sources of variance including age, gender, common medical conditions, years of education, and reading level to generate norms stratified on the most relevant bases. Three hundred and fifty-five African Americans aged 55+ and living independently completed the RBANS and health, education, and psychosocial interviews. Hypertension and type 2 diabetes were unrelated to overall RBANS performance once age and education were accounted for. Age, education, and WRAT-3 Reading score (a proxy for scholastic attainment) were independent predictors of RBANS performance. Females performed better on List Learning, Story Memory, Fluency, Coding, List Recall, and List Recognition; males were superior on Line Orientation and Picture Naming. In addition to generating norms stratified by age, we provide descriptive statistics grouped by age and education, and by age and WRAT-3 Reading grade level, to provide clinicians with the opportunity to tailor their interpretation of scores based upon perceived best fit for their patient. Regression formulas are provided to address gender differences. To complement the standard index norms, we provide norms for alternative indexes representing additional an factor structure of cognitive domains.
    The Clinical Neuropsychologist 06/2015; DOI:10.1080/13854046.2015.1039589
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To identify approximately 500 cases of incident cognitive impairment (ICI) in a large, national sample adapting an existing cognitive test-based case definition and to examine relationships of vascular risk factors with ICI. Participants were from the REGARDS study, a national sample of 30,239 African-American and White Americans. Participants included in this analysis had normal cognitive screening and no history of stroke at baseline, and at least one follow-up cognitive assessment with a three-test battery (TTB). Regression-based norms were applied to TTB scores to identify cases of ICI. Logistic regression was used to model associations with baseline vascular risk factors. We identified 495 participants with ICI of 17,630 eligible participants. In multivariable modeling, income (OR 1.83 CI 1.27,2.62), stroke belt residence (OR 1.45 CI 1.18,1.78), history of transient ischemic attack (OR 1.90 CI 1.29,2.81), coronary artery disease(OR 1.32 CI 1.02,1.70), diabetes (OR 1.48 CI 1.17,1.87), obesity (OR 1.40 CI 1.05,1.86), and incident stroke (OR 2.73 CI 1.52,4.90) were associated with ICI. We adapted a previously validated cognitive test-based case definition to identify cases of ICI. Many previously identified risk factors were associated with ICI, supporting the criterion-related validity of our definition.
    The Clinical Neuropsychologist 05/2015; DOI:10.1080/13854046.2015.1042524
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study investigated the classification accuracy of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form validity scales in a sample of disability claimants and civil forensic litigants. A criterion-groups design was used, classifying examinees as "Failed Slick Criteria" through low performance on at least two performance validity indices (stand-alone or embedded) and "Passed Slick Criteria." The stand-alone measures included the Test of Memory Malingering and the Dot Counting Test. The embedded indices were extracted from the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales Digit Span and Vocabulary subtests, the California Verbal Learning Test-II, and the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test. Among groups classified by primary complaints at the time of evaluation, those alleging neurological conditions were more frequently classified as Failed Slick Criteria than those alleging psychiatric or medical conditions. Among those with neurological or psychiatric complaints, the F-r, FBS-r, and RBS scales differentiated between those who Passed Slick Criteria from those who Failed Slick Criteria. The Fs scale was also significantly higher in the Failed Slick Criteria compared to Passed Slick Criteria examinees within the psychiatric complaints group. Results indicated that interpretation of scale scores should take into account the examinees' presenting illness. While this study has limitations, it highlights the possibility of different cutoffs depending on the presenting complaints and the need for further studies to cross-validate the results.
    The Clinical Neuropsychologist 04/2015; 29(2):1-17. DOI:10.1080/13854046.2015.1033020
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There is limited research examining the relationship between socioeconomic status (SES) and neuropsychological functioning, particularly in racial/ethnic minority and HIV+ populations. However, there are complex associations between poverty, education, HIV disease, race/ethnicity, and health outcomes in the US. We explored these relationships among an ethnically diverse sample of 134 HIV+ adults using a standardized SES measure (i.e., the Hollingshead scale), a comprehensive NP test battery, and a functional evaluation (i.e., Patient's Assessment of Own Functioning Inventory and Modified Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Scale). Bivariate analyses showed that adult SES was significantly, positively correlated with neuropsychological performance on specific tests within the domains of verbal fluency, attention/concentration, learning, memory, processing speed, and executive functioning, and childhood SES was significantly linked to measures of verbal fluency, processing speed, and executive functioning. In a series of linear regressions, controlling for SES significantly attenuated group differences in NP test scores between racial/ethnic minority individuals and non-Hispanic White individuals. Finally, SES scores significantly differed across HIV-Associated Neurocognitive Disorder (HAND) diagnoses. In a binary logistic regression, SES was the only independent predictor of HAND diagnosis. HIV+ individuals with lower SES may be more vulnerable to HIV-associated neuropsychological sequelae due to prominent health disparities, although the degree to which this is influenced by factors such as test bias remains unclear. Overall, our results suggest that SES is significantly linked to neuropsychological test performance in HIV+ individuals, and is an important factor to consider in clinical practice.
    The Clinical Neuropsychologist 04/2015; 29(2):1-23. DOI:10.1080/13854046.2015.1029974
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Performance validity tests (PVTs) are not widely used beyond medico-legal contexts in the UK. A UK survey suggests clinicians have reservations about their accuracy in clinical settings. This study sought to explore the validity of PVTs in an acute adult neuropsychology setting and to establish a potential "false positive" (FP) base rate. Failures on the Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT) in a consecutive clinical series of 405 patients were evaluated systematically and allocated to groups depending on clinical context. All failures were checked against the test's "dementia profile". Of the 405 participants, 329 passed the MSVT (81.2%), while 76 participants (18.8%) failed based on standard criteria. A 5.2% rate of potentially 'unexplained' failures was found. Other reasons for failure were classified as: presumed malingered neurocognitive dysfunction (4.6%), dementia/significant cognitive impairment (3.7%), technical/visual problems (1.8%), and "unexplained failure" with contributory factors (2.4%). These results suggest test specificity between 0.95 and 0.90. Most of the clinically significantly impaired patients matched the dementia profile (86.7%). Our results support the sensitivity, but not the specificity, of the dementia profile. However, approximately 1 in 20 patients failed the MSVT despite an otherwise unremarkable neuropsychological presentation; moreover, mood and pain may affect MSVT performance. Clinical implications for interpreting test scores are discussed.
    The Clinical Neuropsychologist 03/2015; 29(2):1-18. DOI:10.1080/13854046.2015.1022226
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In a recently published article in this journal, Odland, Lammy, Perle, Martin, and Grote report Monte Carlo-simulated normative base rates of scale elevations on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF). Their primary conclusion-reflected in the title of their article-is that MMPI-2-RF interpretation is associated with "high risk of pathologizing healthy adults" when the 40 substantive scales of the test are simultaneously interpreted. In this paper, we describe how their conclusion follows from several faulty premises, three of which were already debunked in an earlier article and remain false despite counterarguments proposed by Odland and colleagues. We also address these authors' misinterpretation of their analyses and, furthermore, their premise that MMPI-2-RF interpretive guidelines are flawed because they "currently do not account for a basic statistical principle: Type I (or alpha) error inflation" (p. 1). This premise is irrelevant to psychological test interpretation and misaligned with neuropsychological testing literature cited in support of it. Consistent with suggestions by some of the authors they cite, we reiterate MMPI-2-RF interpretive guidelines designed to mitigate the impact of measurement error (not alpha error) by way of a scientific assessment approach that relies on integration of information derived from multiple sources.
    The Clinical Neuropsychologist 02/2015; 29(2):183-96. DOI:10.1080/13854046.2015.1040843