Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38960466›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2024

Effects of changing criteria on improving interRAI assessment for elder abuse: analysis of a national dataset from Aotearoa New Zealand.

Robin Turner, Paul Glue, Yoram Barak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Robin TurnerBiostatistics Centre, University of Otago, Dunedin, Otago, New Zealand.
Paul GluePsychological Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, Otago, New Zealand.
Yoram BarakPsychological Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, Otago, New Zealand yoram.barak@otago.ac.nz.ORCID 0000-0002-8271-4255

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesGlobally, one in six older adults in the community will be a victim of abuse (elder abuse; EA). Despite these horrific statistics, EA remains largely undetected and under-reported. Available screening methods and tools fail to accurately identify the phenomenon's true prevalence. We aimed to test assessment capture rates by altering the criteria for suspicion of EA in the interRAI-HC (International Resident Assessment Instrument-Home Care) in a large national dataset.

designWe employed secondary analyses of existing data to test a methodology to improve the detection of older adults at risk of EA using the interRAI-HC, which currently underestimates the extent of abuse.

settingThe interRAI is a suite of clinical assessment instruments. In Aotearoa New Zealand, interRAI is mandatory in aged residential care and home and community services for older people living in the community. They are designed to show the assessor opportunities for improvement and any risks to the person's health. OUTCOME MEASURE: Capture rates of individuals at risk of EA when the interRAI Abuse-Clinical Assessment Protocol (A-CAP) is changed to include the unable to determine abuse (UDA) group shown in a pilot study to increase capture rates of individuals at risk of EA.

resultsAnalysis of 9 years of interRAI-HC data (July 2013-June 2022) was undertaken, encompassing 186 713 individual assessments consisting of 108 992 women (58.4%) and 77 469 men (41.5%). The mean age was 82.1 years (range: 65-109); the majority 161 378 were European New Zealanders (86.4%) and the most common minority ethnicity was Māori (6.1%). Those at high risk of abuse (A-CAP) tended to be male (2402; 51.0%), were 79.2 years old on average (range 65-105), with 49.6% (2335) living alone, 39.4% (1858) suffering from depression and a majority were assessed as not having independent decision making (2942; 62.5%). In comparison, the UDA group showed similar characteristics to the A-CAP group on some measures. They were slightly younger than the general sample, with a mean age 80.1 years (range 65-107), they had higher rates of depression (2123; 33.5%) compared with the general sample (25 936; 14.8%) and a majority were assessed as not having independent decision-making (3855; 60.9%). The UDA group is distinct from the general sample and the UDA group broadly has similar but less extreme characteristics to the A-CAP group. Through altering the criteria for suspicion of EA, capture rates of at-risk individuals could be more than doubled from 2.5% to 5.9%.

conclusionsWe propose that via adapting the interRAI-HC criteria to include the UDA category, the identification of older adults at risk of EA could be substantially improved, facilitating enhanced protection of this vulnerable population.

Indexed as

Elder AbuseGeriatric AssessmentAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleNew ZealandPrevalenceRisk AssessmentAgingHealth policyOld age psychiatry

Identifiers

PMID38960466
PMCPMC11227781

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.