Do individuals in mental health neurological outpatient and non-clinical populations have distinct profiles on the common cognitive complaints checklist (CCCC)?

Objectives: To use the Common Cognitive Complaints Checklist to provide base-rate data of common cognitive complaints in non-clinical individuals; and to identify common cognitive complaints that discriminate between three populations: non-clinical, mental health, mixed-neurological. Methods: 133 vo...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Surridge, Karen Suzanne
Published: University of Birmingham 2013
Subjects:
150
Online Access:https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.571818
id ndltd-bl.uk-oai-ethos.bl.uk-571818
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-bl.uk-oai-ethos.bl.uk-5718182019-04-03T06:27:29ZDo individuals in mental health neurological outpatient and non-clinical populations have distinct profiles on the common cognitive complaints checklist (CCCC)?Surridge, Karen Suzanne2013Objectives: To use the Common Cognitive Complaints Checklist to provide base-rate data of common cognitive complaints in non-clinical individuals; and to identify common cognitive complaints that discriminate between three populations: non-clinical, mental health, mixed-neurological. Methods: 133 volunteers, recruited from three populations (non-clinical, mental health, mixed-neurological), completed measures of psychological distress, cognitive complaints and intellectual functioning. Results: The mental health group reported significantly higher levels of distress, and individuals with higher levels of distress tended to report more cognitive complaints. Base-rate data was established by calculating patterns of endorsement in the non-clinical group, providing a profile of ‘normal’ reporting. Three discriminant function analyses were applied, which performed excellently, revealing 26 items that maximally discriminated between the groups. Conclusions: The base-rate data revealed that it was unusual for individuals in the non-clinical group to report cognitive complaints occurring very frequently. These data could help clinicians determine whether or not the frequency of any complaint is ‘normal’. The calculated discriminant functions for the 26 identified items could be used to plot probabilities of responses falling within each of the three populations, helping clinicians determine the population in which their patients’ responses are likely to fall. Strengths and limitations are discussed along with suggestions for future research.150BF PsychologyUniversity of Birminghamhttps://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.571818http://etheses.bham.ac.uk//id/eprint/4143/Electronic Thesis or Dissertation
collection NDLTD
sources NDLTD
topic 150
BF Psychology
spellingShingle 150
BF Psychology
Surridge, Karen Suzanne
Do individuals in mental health neurological outpatient and non-clinical populations have distinct profiles on the common cognitive complaints checklist (CCCC)?
description Objectives: To use the Common Cognitive Complaints Checklist to provide base-rate data of common cognitive complaints in non-clinical individuals; and to identify common cognitive complaints that discriminate between three populations: non-clinical, mental health, mixed-neurological. Methods: 133 volunteers, recruited from three populations (non-clinical, mental health, mixed-neurological), completed measures of psychological distress, cognitive complaints and intellectual functioning. Results: The mental health group reported significantly higher levels of distress, and individuals with higher levels of distress tended to report more cognitive complaints. Base-rate data was established by calculating patterns of endorsement in the non-clinical group, providing a profile of ‘normal’ reporting. Three discriminant function analyses were applied, which performed excellently, revealing 26 items that maximally discriminated between the groups. Conclusions: The base-rate data revealed that it was unusual for individuals in the non-clinical group to report cognitive complaints occurring very frequently. These data could help clinicians determine whether or not the frequency of any complaint is ‘normal’. The calculated discriminant functions for the 26 identified items could be used to plot probabilities of responses falling within each of the three populations, helping clinicians determine the population in which their patients’ responses are likely to fall. Strengths and limitations are discussed along with suggestions for future research.
author Surridge, Karen Suzanne
author_facet Surridge, Karen Suzanne
author_sort Surridge, Karen Suzanne
title Do individuals in mental health neurological outpatient and non-clinical populations have distinct profiles on the common cognitive complaints checklist (CCCC)?
title_short Do individuals in mental health neurological outpatient and non-clinical populations have distinct profiles on the common cognitive complaints checklist (CCCC)?
title_full Do individuals in mental health neurological outpatient and non-clinical populations have distinct profiles on the common cognitive complaints checklist (CCCC)?
title_fullStr Do individuals in mental health neurological outpatient and non-clinical populations have distinct profiles on the common cognitive complaints checklist (CCCC)?
title_full_unstemmed Do individuals in mental health neurological outpatient and non-clinical populations have distinct profiles on the common cognitive complaints checklist (CCCC)?
title_sort do individuals in mental health neurological outpatient and non-clinical populations have distinct profiles on the common cognitive complaints checklist (cccc)?
publisher University of Birmingham
publishDate 2013
url https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.571818
work_keys_str_mv AT surridgekarensuzanne doindividualsinmentalhealthneurologicaloutpatientandnonclinicalpopulationshavedistinctprofilesonthecommoncognitivecomplaintschecklistcccc
_version_ 1719012857732923392