Psychometric properties of a decisional capacity screening tool for individuals contemplating participation in Alzheimer's disease research

Journal of Alzheimer's Disease

Volumn 46, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 1-9

  Seaman, Jennifer Burgher ^a   Terhorst, Lauren ^b   Gentry, Amanda ^b   Hunsaker, Amanda ^a,b   Parker, Lisa S ^c   Lingler, Jennifer Hagerty ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

Alzheimer's disease; decisional capacity; informed consent; instrumentation

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ALZHEIMER DISEASE; ARTICLE; COGNITION; COGNITIVE DEFECT; CONCURRENT VALIDITY; CONSTRUCT VALIDITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CONVENIENCE SAMPLE; CRONBACH ALPHA COEFFICIENT; DISCRIMINANT VALIDITY; FEMALE; FRIEND; HUMAN; INTERNAL CONSISTENCY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MILD COGNITIVE IMPAIRMENT; MINI MENTAL STATE EXAMINATION; PATIENT DECISION MAKING; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOMETRY; RELIABILITY; SATISFACTION; SCORING SYSTEM; SCREENING TEST; SOCIAL SUPPORT; TRUST; UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO BRIEF ASSESSMENT OF CAPACITY TO CONSENT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; DECISION MAKING; DEMENTIA; DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS; FAMILY; MENTAL HEALTH; MIDDLE AGED; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TEST; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGY; VERY ELDERLY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ALZHEIMER DISEASE; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; DECISION MAKING; DEMENTIA; DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS; FAMILY; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MENTAL STATUS SCHEDULE; MIDDLE AGED; MILD COGNITIVE IMPAIRMENT; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS; PSYCHOMETRICS; SCHIZOPHRENIC PSYCHOLOGY;

EID: 84929318988     PISSN: 13872877     EISSN: 18758908     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3233/JAD-142559     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Appelbaum PS, Roth LH (1982) Competency to consent to research: A psychiatric overview. Arch Gen Psychiatry 39, 951-958.
2. Beauchamp TL, Childress JF (2009) Prinicples of Biomedical Ethics, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
3. Department of Health and Human Services (2009) Part 46: Code of Federal Regulations. Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, p. 128.
4. Buchanan AE, Brock DW (1989) Deciding for Others: The Ethics of Surrogate Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.
5. National Bioethics Advisory Commission (1998) Research involving persons with mental disorders that may affect decision making capacity. In 1998-1999 Biennial Report. National Bioethics Advisory Commission, Rockville, MD.
6. Palmer B, Dunn L, Depp C, Eyler L, Jeste D (2007) Decisional capacity to consent to research among patients with bipolar disorder: Comparison with schizophrenia patients and healthy subjects. J Clin Psychiatry 68, 689-696.
7. Jefferson AL, Lambe S, Moser DJ, Byerly LK, Ozonoff A, Karlawish JH (2008) Decisional capacity for research participation in individuals with mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc 56, 1236-1243.
8. Appelbaum PS, Grisso T (2001) MacCAT-CR: MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Clinical Research, Professional Resource Press, Sarasota, FL.
9. Jeste DV, Palmer BW, Appelbaum PS, Golshan S, Glorioso D, Dunn LB, Kim K, Meeks T, Kraemer HC (2007) A new brief instrument for assessing decisional capacity for clinical research. Arch Gen Psychiatry 64, 966-974.
10. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR (1975) Mini-mental state: A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 12, 189-198.
11. Lopez OL, Becker JT, Klunk W, Saxton J, Hamilton RL, Kaufer DI, Sweet RA, Cidis Meltzer C, Wisniewski S, Kamboh MI, DeKosky ST (2000) Research evaluation and diagnosis of probable Alzheimer's disease over the last two decades: I. Neurology 55, 1854-1862.
12. Lingler JH, Schmidt KL, Gentry AL, Hu L, Terhorst LA (2014) A new measure of research participant burden: Brief report. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 9, 46-49.
13. Petersen RC, Doody R, Kurz A, Mohs RC, Morris JC, Rabins PV, Ritchie K, Rossor M, Thal L, Winblad B (2001) Current conceptsin mild cognitive impairment.Arch Neurol58, 1985-1992.
14. Lopez OL, Jagust WJ, DeKosky ST, Becker JT, Fitzpatrick A, Dulberg C, Breitner J, Lyketsos C, Jones B, Kawas C, Carlson M, Kuller LH (2003) Prevalence and classification of mild cognitive impairment in the Cardiovascular Health Study Cognition Study: Part 1. Arch Neurol 60, 1385-1389.
15. McKhann G, Drachman D, Folstein M, Katzman R, Price D, Stadlan EM (1984) Clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease: Report ofthe NINCDS-ADRDA Work Group under the auspices of Department of Health and Human Services Task Force on Alzheimer's Disease. Neurology 34, 939-944.
16. Hall MA, Camacho F, Lawlor JS, DePuy V, Sugarman J, Weinfurt K (2006) Measuring trust in medical researchers. Med Care 44, 1048-1053.
17. Haley WE, Gitlin LN, Wisniewski SR, Mahoney DF, Coon DW, Winter L, Corcoran M, Schinfeld S, Ory M (2004) Well-being, appraisal, and coping in African-American and Caucasian dementia caregivers: Findings from the REACH study. Aging Ment Health 8, 316-329.
18. Sachs GA, Stocking CB, Stern R, Cox DM, Hougham G, Sachs RS (1994) Ethical aspects of dementia research: Informed consent and proxy consent. Clin Res 42, 403-412.
19. Shrout P, Fleiss J (1997) Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 86, 420-428.
20. Hatcher L (1995) A step-by-step approach to using the SAS system for factor analysis and structural equation modeling, SAS Institute, Cary, NC.
21. Bryant FB, Yarnold PR (1994) Principal components analysis and exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. In Reading and Understanding Multivariate Statistics, Grimm LG, Yarnold PR, eds. American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.
22. Harman HH (1976) Modern Factor Analysis, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL.
23. Pett M, Lackey N, Sullivan J (2003) Making Sense of Factor Analysis: The Use of Factor Analysis for Instrument Development in Health Care Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
24. Costello AB, Osborne J (2005) Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. PARE 10, 1-9.
25. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS (2007) Using Multivarate Statistics, Pearson, Boston, MA.
26. Cronbach L (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16, 297-344.
27. DeVellis R (2003) Scale Development: Theory and Applications, Sage, Newbury Park.
28. Borkowski J, Benton A, Spreen O (1967) Word fluency and brain damage. Neuropsychologia 5, 135-140.
29. Carmines EG, Zeller RA (1979) Reliabilityand ValiditAssess-ment, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
30. Kim SYH, Karlawish JHT, Caine ED (2002) Current state of research on decision-making competence of cognitively impaired elderly persons. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry 10, 151-165.