Cited by 148Down syndrome and intellectual disability researchGenetics and Neurodevelopmental DisordersCognitive Abilities and Testing

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Improving IQ measurement in intellectual disabilities using true deviation from population norms

Open access
Sansone, Stephanie M, Schneider, Andrea, Bickel, Erika, Berry-Kravis, Elizabeth, Prescott, Christina, Hessl, David·2014·Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Intellectual disability (ID) is characterized by global cognitive deficits, yet the very IQ tests used to assess ID have limited range and precision in this population, especially for more impaired individuals. METHODS: We describe the development and validation of a method of raw z-score transformation (based on general population norms) that ameliorates floor effects and improves the precision of IQ measurement in ID using the Stanford Binet 5 (SB5) in fragile X syndrome (FXS; n = 106), the leading inherited cause of ID, and in individuals with idiopathic autism spectrum disorder (ASD; n = 205). We compared the distributional characteristics and Q-Q plots from the standardized scores with the deviation z-scores. Additionally, we examined the relationship between both scoring methods and multiple criterion measures. RESULTS: We found evidence that substantial and meaningful variation in cognitive ability on standardized IQ tests among individuals with ID is lost when converting raw scores to standardized scaled, index and IQ scores. Use of the deviation z- score method rectifies this problem, and accounts for significant additional variance in criterion validation measures, above and beyond the usual IQ scores. Additionally, individual and group-level cognitive strengths and weaknesses are recovered using deviation scores. CONCLUSION: Traditional methods for generating IQ scores in lower functioning individuals with ID are inaccurate and inadequate, leading to erroneously flat profiles. However assessment of cognitive abilities is substantially improved by measuring true deviation in performance from standardization sample norms. This work has important implications for standardized test development, clinical assessment, and research for which IQ is an important measure of interest in individuals with neurodevelopmental disorders and other forms of cognitive impairment.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/1866-1955-6-16

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Quantile-quantile (Q-Q) plot of the standardized and deviation intelligence quotient (IQ scores). Open circles represent the actual data points. The solid, diagonal red line is the reference line for the expected, normal distribution. The dotted lines represent the upper and lower bounds of the 95% confidence interval. EXIQ, Extended IQ; FSIQ, Full Scale IQ; NVIQ, Non-verbal IQ; VIQ, Verbal IQ. For the EXIQ plot, standard Full Scale IQ is shown above IQ = 40 for presentation and plotting purposes.
Figure 1 Quantile-quantile (Q-Q) plot of the standardized and deviation intelligence quotient (IQ scores). Open circles represent the actual data points. The solid, diagonal red line is the reference line for the expected, normal distribution. The dotted lines represent the upper and lower bounds of the 95% confidence interval. EXIQ, Extended IQ; FSIQ, Full Scale IQ; NVIQ, Non-verbal IQ; VIQ, Verbal IQ. For the EXIQ plot, standard Full Scale IQ is shown above IQ = 40 for presentation and plotting purposes.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Bivariate association of deviation and standardized IQ scores with their corresponding criterion measures with marginal boxplots. EXIQ, Extended IQ; FSIQ, Full Scale IQ; NVIQ, Non-verbal IQ; PPVT, Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test; VABC, Vineland Adaptive Behavior Composite; VIQ, Verbal IQ.
Figure 2 Bivariate association of deviation and standardized IQ scores with their corresponding criterion measures with marginal boxplots. EXIQ, Extended IQ; FSIQ, Full Scale IQ; NVIQ, Non-verbal IQ; PPVT, Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test; VABC, Vineland Adaptive Behavior Composite; VIQ, Verbal IQ.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 Subtest raw scores (open triangles), standardized scores (closed circles), and deviation (z) scores (closed squares) for two case examples. FR, fluid reasoning; KN, knowledge; NV, non-verbal; QR, quantitative reasoning; V, verbal; VS, visual spatial processing; WM, working memory.
Figure 3 Subtest raw scores (open triangles), standardized scores (closed circles), and deviation (z) scores (closed squares) for two case examples. FR, fluid reasoning; KN, knowledge; NV, non-verbal; QR, quantitative reasoning; V, verbal; VS, visual spatial processing; WM, working memory.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 Profile of standardized and deviation (z) subtest scores by diagnosis group (mean ± SD). FR, fluid reasoning; KN, knowledge; NV, non-verbal; QR, quantitative reasoning; V, verbal; VS, visual spatial processing; WM, working memory.
Figure 4 Profile of standardized and deviation (z) subtest scores by diagnosis group (mean ± SD). FR, fluid reasoning; KN, knowledge; NV, non-verbal; QR, quantitative reasoning; V, verbal; VS, visual spatial processing; WM, working memory.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 34 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Roid G: Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales - Examiner’s Manual. 2003, Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing, 5
  2. Sparrow S, Balla D, Cicchetti D: Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales-Interview Edition. 1984, Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Sansone, S. M., Schneider, A., Bickel, E., Berry-Kravis, E., Prescott, C., & Hessl, D.
Affiliations
  • University of California Davis Medical Center (US)
  • Rush University Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Hessl, David
Venue
Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Published
2014-07-08
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
16-16
ISSN
  • 1866-1947 (ISSN-L)
  • 1866-1955
OpenAlex
W2122684341
Cited by
148
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3
FWCI
3.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Autism Speaks
  • National Fragile X Foundation
  • University of California, Davis
  • National Institute of Mental Health (U24MH081810)
  • University of California Davis School of Medicine
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Down syndrome and intellectual disability research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
Keywords
intellectual disability, IQ assessment, floor effect, fragile X syndrome, autism spectrum disorder, neurodevelopmental disorders

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review