ArticleJournal of elder abuse & neglect
Cross-validation of the screening scale in an adult protective services sample.
Article in Journal of elder abuse & neglect. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- The WALLET Study: Examining Early Memory Loss and Personal Finance.Innovation in aging · 2022Article
- Context Matters: Financial, Psychological, and Relationship Insecurity Around Personal Finance Is Associated With Financial Exploitation.The Gerontologist · 2020Article
- Implementation of financial decision making scales into statewide APS practice: the Michigan experience.Journal of elder abuse & neglectArticle
- Which Items of the Financial Decision Tracker Differentiate Those with Decision-making Deficits from Those with No Deficits? Data from the Michigan APS Implementation Project.Clinical gerontologistArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Adult Protective Services (APS) professionals are often called on to assess decision-making capacity when investigating financial exploitation. Previous research found that in consecutive APS cases, a decision-making screening scale (LFDSS) also detected financial exploitation. The purpose of this study was to apply the clinical cutoff scores derived from the previous study to a new sample of APS cases. Using a sample of 105 participants, from APS workers across 5 counties this study investigated the clinical utility of the LFDSS to detect financial exploitation based on ratings by APS professionals using the scale. Results demonstrate that the LFDSS has excellent internal consistency and clinical utility properties. This paper provides support for use of the LFDSS as a reliable and valid instrument. Instructions for use of the LFDSS are included in the article, along with information about online support tools.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.