↓ Skip to main content

Reliability of health-related quality-of-life assessments made by older adults and significant others for health states of increasing cognitive impairment

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
116 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Reliability of health-related quality-of-life assessments made by older adults and significant others for health states of increasing cognitive impairment
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12955-016-0579-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gina Bravo, Modou Sene, Marcel Arcand

Abstract

Older adults are encouraged by many organizations to engage in advance care planning in the event of decisional incapacity. Planning for future health care often involves anticipating health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in states of reduced cognitive functioning. No study has yet examined whether anticipated HRQoL is stable over time. The accuracy with which significant others can predict how an older adult envisions HRQoL in a future state of cognitive impairment is also unknown. We investigated the extent to which health-related quality-of-life ratings made by older adults and designated proxies for health states of increasing cognitive impairment are consistent over time and agree with each other. Results are based on HRQoL ratings made on a 5-point Likert scale by 235 community-based elder-proxy dyads on three occasions. Ratings were obtained for the older adult's current health state as well as under the assumption that he/she had a mild to moderate stroke, incurable brain cancer or severe dementia. Data were analyzed using both traditional approaches (e.g., intraclass correlation coefficients, Bland-Altman plots) and the theory of generalizability. We found ratings to be reasonably consistent over time and in good agreement within dyads, even more so as implied cognitive functioning worsened. Across health states, ratings over time or within elder-proxy dyads were no more than one category apart in over 87% of cases. Using the theory of generalizability, we further found that, of the two facets investigated, rater had a greater influence on score variability than occasion. These findings underscore the importance of discussing health-related quality-of-life issues during advance care planning and involving designated proxies in the discussion to enhance their understanding of the role that HRQoL should play in actual decision-making situations. Medical decision-making may be influenced by healthcare providers' and family members' assessments of an incapacitated patient's health-related quality of life, in addition to that of the designated proxy. Future studies should investigate whether these two groups of individuals share the views of the patient and the designated proxy on anticipated HRQoL.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 116 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 13%
Researcher 12 10%
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Other 21 18%
Unknown 33 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 27 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 16%
Psychology 14 12%
Social Sciences 7 6%
Unspecified 5 4%
Other 11 9%
Unknown 34 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 January 2017.
All research outputs
#17,855,900
of 22,931,367 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1,499
of 2,179 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#293,792
of 420,788 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#30
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,931,367 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,179 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 420,788 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.