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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Item distribution and inter-rater reliability of the German version of the quality of life in Alzheimer’s disease scale (QoL-AD) proxy for people with dementia living in nursing homes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Geriatrics, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12877-018-0834-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Martin Nikolaus Dichter, Eva-Maria Wolschon, Christian G. G. Schwab, Gabriele Meyer, Sascha Köpke |
| Abstract |
The Quality of Life in Alzheimer's disease scale (QoL-AD) is a widely used Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) instrument. However, studies investigating the instrument's inter-rater reliability (IRR) are missing. This study aimed to determine the item distribution and IRR of the German proxy version of the QoL-AD (13 Items) and a nursing home-specific instrument version (QoL-AD NH, 15 Items). The instruments were applied to 73 people with dementia living in eight nursing homes in Germany. Individuals with dementia were assessed two times by blinded proxy raters. The IRR analyses were based on methodological criteria of the quality appraisal tool for studies of diagnostic reliability (QAREL), the COSMIN group and the single-measure Intra-Class Correlation Coefficient (ICC) for absolute agreement ≥0.70. All items for both instrument versions demonstrated acceptable item difficulty, with the exception of one item (QoL-AD proxy). The IRR was moderate for the QoL-AD (ICC: 0.65) and insufficient for the QoL-AD NH (ICC: 0.18). The additional computation of the average measure ICC for two proxy-raters demonstrated a strong IRR (ICC: 0.79) for the QoL-AD and a weak IRR for the QoL-AD NH (ICC: 0.31). The detailed analysis of the IRR for each item underpinned the need for the further development of both instruments. The unsatisfactory IRRs for both instruments highlight the need for the development of a user guide including general instructions for instrument application as well as definitions and examples reflecting item meaning. Priority should be given to the development of reliable proxy-person versions of both instruments. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02295462 , Date of registration: 11-20-2014. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 73 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 15% |
| Researcher | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Unknown | 33 | 45% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 15% |
| Psychology | 4 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 34 | 47% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 22 March 2019.
All research outputs
#3,981,724
of 23,090,520 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#1,022
of 3,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,795
of 328,030 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#28
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,090,520 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,261 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its peers.
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 328,030 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.