ArticlePsychogeriatrics : the official journal of the Japanese Psychogeriatric Society2023
Development, reliability, and validity of a self-assessment scale for dementia care management.
Article in Psychogeriatrics : the official journal of the Japanese Psychogeriatric Society, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and validation of the community development competency scale (ComDe-scale) for public health nurses in Japanese community general support centers: A Nationwide study.Japan journal of nursing science : JJNS · 2026Article
- Article
- Role transition in comorbidity management: a qualitative study of dementia home care trajectories.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Effect of intermittent oro-esophageal tube feeding combined with continuous nursing intervention on patients with intracerebral hemorrhage after surgery.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- DTI-ALPS index as a predictor of glymphatic system dysfunction in cerebral infarction.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to develop a self-assessment scale for care management of people with dementia and examine its reliability and validity.
methodsBased on Bloom's Taxonomy, previous research, and experts' opinions on dementia and care management, a scale consisting of 18 items was developed to assess care managers' attitudes, knowledge, and skills in their management of people with dementia. To examine the scale's reliability and validity, data were collected from 638 care managers. Construct validity using exploratory factor analysis, known-group validity, and internal consistency reliability of the scale were evaluated.
resultsExploratory factor analysis supported the construct validity with a four-factor model and explained 59.1% of the total variance. Following were the four factors: Factor I 'Person centred care'; Factor II 'Understanding of disease characteristics, treatment and care'; Factor III 'Understanding of people with dementia and care management according to their characteristics'; and Factor IV 'Utilization of local resources surrounding people with dementia'. Regarding the known-group validity, results showed that the group with a qualified chief care manager scored significantly higher than the group without one on Factors I (P = 0.013) and III (P = 0.026). Cronbach's alpha coefficient for the 18 items was 0.928.
conclusionsThe findings prove that the scale has acceptable reliability and validity, and can help care managers reflect on their practice. Future research is desirable to measure the validation of change in the scale.
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.