ArticleBMC geriatrics2026
Psychometric validation and cross-cultural adaptation of the dementia knowledge assessment Scale-Thai (DKAS-Thai).
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2026. 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.
- Family carers' knowledge and practices in dementia care for hospitalized older adults: a multi-center cross-sectional study in Thailand.Frontiers in medicine · 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccurate knowledge about dementia among healthcare professionals and family carers is critical for timely recognition, appropriate management, and the delivery of person-centred care. Valid, culturally appropriate instruments are needed to assess knowledge, identify misunderstandings, and guide targeted educational interventions. The Dementia Knowledge Assessment Scale (DKAS) is a widely used, multidimensional measure of dementia knowledge covering causes and characteristics, communication and behaviour, care considerations, and risk and health promotion. However, prior to this study, no Thai version of the DKAS had undergone rigorous cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric evaluation for use with healthcare professionals and lay carers. This study aimed to adapt and validate the DKAS-Thai for use with healthcare professionals and lay carers.
methodsUsing established cross-cultural adaptation procedures, the original 25-item DKAS was translated into Thai, with input from an expert panel (N = 9) and a pilot group (N = 40). The final version was administered to 486 participants, including hospital professionals (N = 195), family carers (N = 136), and externs (N = 155). Psychometric evaluation included analyses of internal consistency, test-retest reliability using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).
resultsThe DKAS-Thai demonstrated good overall internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha (α) = 0.825). Three subscales showed lower reliability (α = 0.621–0.750), approaching the commonly accepted threshold of 0.70, while the Communication and Behaviour subscale exhibited notably low reliability (α = 0.327). CFA of the original four-factor model indicated fit indices approaching acceptable thresholds (RMSEA = 0.083, CFI = 0.897, TLI = 0.884, SRMR = 0.109). Removal of the three poorly performing items from the Communication and Behaviour subscale did not substantially improve the subscale’s psychometric properties. Test-retest reliability, evaluated in a subsample of 128 participants, indicated moderate score stability over time. The DKAS-Thai also demonstrated strong discriminative validity, effectively distinguishing dementia knowledge among hospital professionals, externs, and carers (p < 0.001).
conclusionThe DKAS-Thai is a culturally adapted, valid, and reliable scale for assessing dementia knowledge in Thailand. It can identify knowledge gaps and guide targeted educational interventions as dementia care gains importance nationally. Ongoing refinement and validation in broader Thai populations are recommended. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.