Measurement choices in multi-site studies of outcomes in dementia.
This paper summarizes the measurement choices made by selected current or recently completed multi-site projects with a common emphasis on measuring outcomes in dementia. Information on number of items and scoring, reason(s) for selecting the measure, and reliability and validity of the measure (either citations providing this information or a report of pertinent unpublished findings) is presented for eight domains: cognition, behavioral symptoms, physical health status, physical functioning and self-care abilities, quality of life, family/staff caregiver outcomes, service use, and cost. We found considerable reliance on the published literature as a guide to measurement choice, motivated largely by measures' superior psychometric properties, their ubiquity in the literature, and/or their brevity or ease of use. There is still evidence of "starting from scratch" in some domains, however. To the extent that these projects reflect the state of the art in dementia-relevant outcomes research, we conclude that comparison of outcomes across studies will continue to be problematic. However, as long as dissemination of methodological as well as substantive findings continues to characterize outcome studies in dementia, there is hope that a more congruent view of how to assess key outcomes in dementia will emerge.
Smyth
K A
KA
University Alzheimer Center, University Hospitals of Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Ferris
S H
SH
Fox
P
P
Heyman
A
A
Holmes
D
D
Morris
J N
JN
Phillips
C D
CD
Schulz
R
R
Teresi
J
J
Whitehouse
P J
PJ
D017028:Caregivers; D003657:Decision Making; D003704:Dementia / Q000628:therapy*; D006302:Health Services Research; D006801:Humans; D015201:Meta-Analysis as Topic; D017063:Outcome Assessment, Health Care; D010865:Pilot Projects; D011788:Quality of Life