Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28806934›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2017

Development and evaluation of the content validity, practicability and feasibility of the Innovative dementia-oriented Assessment system for challenging behaviour in residents with dementia.

Margareta Halek, Daniela Holle, Sabine Bartholomeyczik

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

45 citing papers in PubMed, 113 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Margareta HalekGerman Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Stockumer Str. 12, 58453, Witten, Germany. margareta.halek@dzne.de.ORCID 0000-0001-5368-255X
Daniela HolleGerman Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Stockumer Str. 12, 58453, Witten, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6563-4712
Sabine BartholomeyczikSchool of Nursing Science, Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany.
Witten/Herdecke University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOne of the most difficult issues for care staff is the manifestation of challenging behaviour among residents with dementia. The first step in managing this type of behaviour is analysing its triggers. A structured assessment instrument can facilitate this process and may improve carers' management of the situation. This paper describes the development of an instrument designed for this purpose and an evaluation of its content validity and its feasibility and practicability in nursing homes.

methodsThe development process and evaluation of the content validity were based on Lynn's methodology (1998). A literature review (steps 1 + 2) provided the theoretical framework for the instrument and for item formation. Ten experts (step 3) evaluated the first version of the instrument (the Innovative dementia-oriented Assessment (IdA®)) regarding its relevance, clarity, meaningfulness and completeness; content validity indices at the scale-level (S-CVI) and item-level (I-CVI) were calculated. Health care workers (step 4) evaluated the second version in a workshop. Finally, the instrument was introduced to 17 units in 11 nursing homes in a field study (step 5), and 60 care staff members assessed its practicability and feasibility.

resultsThe IdA® used the need-driven dementia-compromised behaviour (NDB) model as a theoretical framework. The literature review and expert-based panel supported the content validity of the IdA®. At the item level, 77% of the ratings had a CVI greater than or equal to 0.78. The majority of the question-ratings (84%, n = 154) and answer-ratings (69%, n = 122) showed valid results, with none below 0.50. The health care workers confirmed the understandability, completeness and plausibility of the IdA®. Steps 3 and 4 led to further item clarification. The carers in the study considered the instrument helpful for reflecting challenging behaviour and beneficial for the care of residents with dementia. Negative ratings referred to the time required and the lack of effect on residents´ behaviour.

conclusionsThere was strong evidence supporting the content validity of the IdA®. Despite the substantial length and time requirement, the instrument was considered helpful for analysing challenging behaviour. Thus, further research on the psychometric qualities, implementation aspects and effectiveness of the IdA® in understanding challenging behaviour is needed.

Indexed as

Problem BehaviorAffective SymptomsAttitude of Health PersonnelCaregiversCognition DisordersCommunicationConsensusDementiaFeasibility StudiesHumansInpatientsNeurologic ExaminationNursing HomesPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsChallenging behaviourContent validity indexDementiaInstrument developmentNursing homeValidity

Identifiers

PMID28806934
PMCPMC5557472
OpenAlexW2748034498

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.