Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29954384›Full record

ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2018

Inter-rater agreement of the Quality of Life-Alzheimer's Disease (QoL-AD) self-rating and proxy rating scale: secondary analysis of RightTimePlaceCare data.

Josephine Römhild, Steffen Fleischer, Gabriele Meyer, Astrid Stephan, Sandra Zwakhalen, Helena Leino-Kilpi, Adelaida Zabalegui, Kai Saks, Maria Soto-Martin, Caroline Sutcliffe and 3 more

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Experiences of Assistive Products and Home Care among Older Clients with and without Dementia in Sweden.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    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

13 authors.

Josephine RömhildInstitute of Health and Nursing Science, Medical Faculty, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle, Germany.
Steffen FleischerInstitute of Health and Nursing Science, Medical Faculty, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle, Germany.
Gabriele MeyerInstitute of Health and Nursing Science, Medical Faculty, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle, Germany.
Astrid StephanInstitute of Health and Nursing Science, Medical Faculty, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle, Germany.
Sandra ZwakhalenDepartment of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Helena Leino-KilpiDepartment of Nursing Science, Faculty of Medicine, University of Turku and Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland.
Adelaida ZabaleguiHospital Clinic of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Kai SaksDepartment of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Maria Soto-MartinGeriatrics Department, Gerontôpole, Toulouse University Hospital, INSERM UMR 1027, Toulouse, France.
Caroline SutcliffeSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Ingalill Rahm HallbergDepartment of Health Sciences, Medical Faculty, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Almuth BergInstitute of Health and Nursing Science, Medical Faculty, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle, Germany. almuth.berg@medizin.uni-halle.de.
RightTimePlaceCare Consortium

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo assess the quality of life of people with dementia, measures are required for self-rating by the person with dementia, and for proxy rating by others. The Quality of Life in Alzheimer's Disease scale (QoL-AD) is available in two versions, QoL-AD-SR (self-rating) and QoL-AD-PR (proxy rating). The aim of our study was to analyse the inter-rater agreement between self- and proxy ratings, in terms of both the total score and the items, including an analysis specific to care setting, and to identify factors associated with this agreement.

methodsCross-sectional QoL-AD data from the 7th Framework European RightTimePlaceCare study were analysed. A total of 1330 cases were included: n = 854 receiving home care and n = 476 receiving institutional long-term nursing care. The proxy raters were informal carers (home care) and best-informed professional carers (institutional long-term nursing care). Inter-rater agreement was investigated using Bland-Altman plots for the QoL-AD total score and by weighted kappa statistics for single items. Associations were investigated by regression analysis.

resultsThe overall QoL-AD assessment of those with dementia revealed a mean value of 33.2 points, and the proxy ratings revealed a mean value of 29.8 points. The Bland-Altman plots revealed a poor agreement between self- and proxy ratings for the overall sample and for both care settings. With one exception (item 'Marriage' weighted kappa 0.26), the weighted kappa values for the single QoL-AD items were below 0.20, indicating poor agreement. Home care setting, dementia-related behavioural and psychological symptoms, and the functional status of the person with dementia, along with the caregiver burden, were associated with the level of agreement. Only the home care setting was associated with an increase larger than the predefined acceptable difference between self- and proxy ratings.

conclusionsProxy quality of life ratings from professional and informal carers appear to be lower than the self-ratings of those with dementia. QoL-AD-SR and QoL-AD-PR are therefore not interchangeable, as the inter-rater agreement differs distinctly. Thus, a proxy rating should be judged as a complementary perspective for a self-assessment of quality of life by those with dementia, rather than as a valid substitute.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAlzheimer DiseaseCaregiversCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHome Care ServicesHumansMaleProxyQuality of LifeSelf ReportSurveys and QuestionnairesDementiaInter-rater agreementPsychometricsQuality of lifeReliability

Identifiers

PMID29954384
PMCPMC6022444

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.