A review of the reliability of remote neuropsychological assessment

The provision of clinical neuropsychological services has predominately been undertaken by way of standardized administration in a face-to-face setting. Interpretation of psychometric findings in this context is dependent on the use of normative comparison. When the standardization in which such psychometric measures are employed deviates from how they were employed in the context of the development of its associated norms, one is left to question the reliability and hence, validity of any such findings and in turn, diagnostic decision making. In light of the current COVID-19 pandemic and resultant social distancing direction, face-to-face neuropsychological assessment has been challenging to undertake. As such, remote (i.e., virtual) neuropsychological assessment has become an obvious solution. Here, and before the results from remote neuropsychological assessment can be said to stand on firm scientific grounds, it is paramount to ensure that results garnered remotely are reliable and valid. To this end, we undertook a review of the literature and present an overview of the landscape. To date, the literature shows evidence for the reliability of remote administration and the clinical implications are paramount. When and where needed, neuropsychologists, psychometric technicians and examinees may no longer need to be in the same physical space to undergo an assessment. These findings are most relevant given the physical distancing practices because of COVID-19. And whilst remote assessment should never supplant face-to-face neuropsychological assessments, it does serve as a valid alternative when necessary.