ArticleThe Clinical neuropsychologist2024
A survey of neuropsychological assessment feedback practices among neuropsychologists.
Article in The Clinical neuropsychologist, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Autism and ADHD Strengths and Needs in a Nutshell - Parental Evaluation of a Digital ICF-Based Assessment Summary Report.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveFeedback on neuropsychological assessment is a critical part of clinical practice, but there are few empirical papers on neuropsychological feedback practices. We sought to fill this gap in the literature by surveying practicing neuropsychologists in the United States. Questions addressed how they provide verbal and written feedback to patients and referral sources. Survey questions also addressed billing practices and training in the provision of feedback.
methodsA survey was developed using Qualtrics XM to survey currently licensed, independently practicing clinical neuropsychologists in the United States about their feedback practices. The survey was completed by 184 individuals.
resultsNearly all respondents reported that they provide verbal feedback to patients, most often in-person, within three weeks following testing. Typically, verbal feedback sessions with patients last 45 min. Verbal feedback was provided to referrals by about half of our sample, typically
conclusionsResults provide an empirical summary of the "state of current practice" for providing neuropsychological assessment feedback. Further experimental research is needed to develop an evidence-base for effective feedback practices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.