Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37033023›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2023

The alternate-form reliability study of six variants of the Brief Visual-Spatial Memory Test-Revised and the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised.

Yumei Cai, Tianlong Yang, Xin Yu, Xue Han, Gong Chen, Chuan Shi

Abstract readComparative StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Sigma-1-targeting multimodal compound HBK-15 reverses memory deficits and restores hippocampal plasticity under NMDA hypofunction.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Yumei CaiPeking University Institute of Population Research, Beijing, China.
Tianlong YangAnjia Hospital, Beijing, China.
Xin YuPeking University Institute of Mental Health (Sixth Hospital), Beijing, China.
Xue HanPeking University Institute of Mental Health (Sixth Hospital), Beijing, China.
Gong ChenPeking University Institute of Population Research, Beijing, China.
Chuan ShiPeking University Institute of Mental Health (Sixth Hospital), Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The revised Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised (HVLT-R) and the Brief Visual-Spatial Memory Test-Revised (BVMT-R) are two widely used test involving verbal and visual learning and memory. In the two tests, six different versions are assembled, respectively, to prevent learning effects. Currently, no researchers have compared the six versions of the two tests. Thus, their usefulness in clinical studies requiring multiple follow-ups is limited. In this work, we confirm the equivalence of six HVLT-R and BVMT-R versions. Methods: 20 people completed all six HVLT-R and BVMT-R versions, while 120 people were randomly assigned to complete one of the six versions of each test. The Intelligence Quotient (IQ) level is measured using the short version of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence test. R4.2.0 is used for statistical analysis. The K-Related sample test (a non-parametric test) is used to observe the differences in test scores among the 20 subjects. The one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) test is utilized to analyze the differences in test scores among the 120 subjects. The scores on different versions are compared using two similar sample tests. The HVLT-R Total Learning, the HVLT-R Delayed Recall, the BVMT-R Total Learning, and the BVMT-R Delayed Recall are indexes for comparison. Version and test scores are used as research factors, while different versions are used as research levels. Results: The results suggest that HVLT-R and BVMT-R versions 3, 5 and 6 are equally difficult, and relatively easy compared to versions 1, 2 and 4. HVLT-R versions 3, 5, and 6 show good reliability and can be used interchangeably when testing word learning ability or short-term memory; BVMT-R Versions 3, 5, and 6 show acceptable reliability and can be can be used interchangeably. Discussion: In the study of multiple follow-ups, it is a must to avoid discrepant versions and choose other equivalent versions. The results from this study could be used as a guide for upcoming studies and clinical applications in China.

Indexed as

Neuropsychological TestsSpatial MemoryVerbal LearningAdultCognitionHumansReproducibility of Resultsalternate-form reliabilityBrief Visual-Spatial Memory Test-Revisedcognitive assessmentHopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revisedpractice effect

Identifiers

PMID37033023
PMCPMC10073731

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.