Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33213386›Full record

ArticleBMC geriatrics2020

Measuring consumer access, appraisal and application of services and information for dementia (CAAASI-Dem): a key component of dementia literacy.

Kathleen Veronica Doherty, Hoang Nguyen, Claire E A Eccleston, Laura Tierney, Ron L Mason, Aidan Bindoff, Andrew Robinson, James Vickers, Fran McInerney

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC geriatrics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

9 authors.

Kathleen Veronica DohertyWicking Dementia Research and Education Centre, College of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, 7001, Australia. Kathleen.Doherty@utas.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-0122-0123
Hoang NguyenWicking Dementia Research and Education Centre, College of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, 7001, Australia.
Claire E A EcclestonWicking Dementia Research and Education Centre, College of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, 7001, Australia.
Laura TierneyWicking Dementia Research and Education Centre, College of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, 7001, Australia.
Ron L MasonWicking Dementia Research and Education Centre, College of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, 7001, Australia.
Aidan BindoffWicking Dementia Research and Education Centre, College of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, 7001, Australia.
Andrew RobinsonWicking Dementia Research and Education Centre, College of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, 7001, Australia.
James VickersWicking Dementia Research and Education Centre, College of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, 7001, Australia.
Fran McInerneyWicking Dementia Research and Education Centre, College of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, 7001, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe ability to locate, navigate and use dementia services and information, either for oneself or in providing care for others, is an essential component of dementia literacy. Despite dementia literacy being understood to be inadequate in many settings, no validated instrument exists to measure these elements. Here we describe the development and preliminary validation of the Consumer Access, Appraisal and Application of Services and Information for Dementia (CAAASI-Dem) tool.

methodsItems were adapted from existing health literacy tools and guided by discussion posts in the Understanding Dementia Massive Open Online Course (UDMOOC). Following expert review and respondent debriefing, a modified CAAASI-Dem was administered to UDMOOC participants online. On the basis of descriptive statistics, inter-item and item total correlations and qualitative feedback, this was further refined and administered online to a second cohort of UDMOOC participants. Exploratory factor analysis identified underlying factor structure. Items were retained if they had significant factor loadings on one factor only. Each factor required at least three items with significant factor loadings. Internal consistency of factors in the final model was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha coefficients.

resultsFrom a pool of 70 initial items with either a 5-point Likert scale (Not at all confident - Extremely confident; or Strongly agree - Strongly disagree) or a binary scale (Yes - No), 65 items were retained in CAAASI-Dem-V1. Statistical and qualitative analysis of 1412 responses led to a further 34 items being removed and 11 revised to improve clarity. The 31 item CAAASI-Dem-V2 tool was subsequently administered to 3146 participants, one item was removed due to redundancy and EFA resulted in the removal of an additional 4 items and determination of a five factor structure: Evaluation and engagement; Readiness; Social supports; Specific dementia services; and Practical aspects.

conclusionsThe five factors and 26 constituent items in CAAASI-Dem align with functional, critical, and communicative aspects of dementia health literacy from the perspective of the carer. As a screening tool for people living with dementia and their carers, CAAASI-Dem potentially provides a means to determine support needs and may be a key component of the dementia literacy assessment toolbox.

Indexed as

DementiaHealth LiteracyFactor Analysis, StatisticalHumansPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesCarerDementiaLiteracyMeasurementServices

Identifiers

PMID33213386
PMCPMC7678312

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.