{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02199528672427337, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01021209740769835, 'mean_word_length': 5.81283422459893, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 1, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Level of Performance Accuracy for Core Halstead-Reitan Measures by Pooling Normal Controls from Published Studies: Comparison with Existing Norms in a Clinical Sample

The Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Test Battery offers a multifaceted, empirically supported interpretive framework for neuropsychological assessment founded upon raw scores referenced to a brain-damaged sample. Complementary approaches have used T scores from normal samples often composed of community volunteers or medical patients, augmented by regression. By pooling normal controls of all types from published studies, a sample large enough for stratification of core Halstead-Reitan measures by age and education was obtained (206 studies, N = 17,980). Comparisons based on T scores with two published normative systems in an outpatient sample produced a continuum: liberal norms for medical patients, intermediate pooled values from many types of subjects, and stringent norms for community volunteers. Features recommending clinical application of pooled norms include enhanced accuracy in clinical situations precluding a full battery, few empty cells or inversions for nonelderly subjects, and a screening application based upon a very large Trail Making Test sample (Trails B: n > 14,000).