ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease reports
Adaptation and validations of Amsterdam instrumental activities of daily living questionnaire-short version for Peru.
Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease reports. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) are key indicators of functional decline in dementia, but culturally adapted tools for Latin America are scarce. Objective: This study aims to assess the validity and robustness of a new Peruvian version of the Amsterdam Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Questionnaire-Short Version (A-IADL-Q-SV-P). Methods: We recruited 171 participants from a cognitive clinic in Peru (81 Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) = 0, 70 CDR = 1, 20 CDR = 2), including 54 with Alzheimer's disease and 36 with frontotemporal dementia. Validity of the A-IADL-Q-SV-P was assessed using quadratic discriminant analysis to classify CDR level. Spearman correlations tested robustness with demographics (age, sex, education) and associations with cognitive (Mini-Mental State Examination), mood (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, Geriatric Depression Scale, and Neuropsychiatric Inventory), and functionality (Pfeffer Functional Activities Questionnaire and Technology-Activities of Daily Living Questionnaire) measures. Results: The A-IADL-Q-SV-P achieved excellent accuracy for classifying dementia severity (accuracy: 0.853, AUC > 0.92). The ability to classify normal cognition had a sensitivity of 0.95 and a specificity of 0.91, and results were similar for patients with Alzheimer's disease or frontotemporal dementia (accuracy > 0.88, sensitivity > 0.95, and specificity > 0.88, AUC > 0.91). We also found weak associations with age, sex, and education (|rho| < 0.2). Furthermore, the A-IADL-Q-SV-P had strong associations with other clinical scales (|rho| > 0.4), particularly in relation to cognition (rho = -0.70) and functionality (rho > 0.87). Conclusions: A-IADL-Q-SV-P demonstrated excellent accuracy in classifying dementia severity, with strong correlations to cognitive and other functionality measures. This supports the utility of A-IADL-Q-SV-P as a culturally adapted tool for assessing functional decline in dementia.
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.