↓ Skip to main content

Item distribution, internal consistency and inter-rater reliability of the German version of the QUALIDEM for people with mild to severe and very severe dementia

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 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
Item distribution, internal consistency and inter-rater reliability of the German version of the QUALIDEM for people with mild to severe and very severe dementia
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12877-016-0296-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Martin Nikolaus Dichter, Christian G. G. Schwab, Gabriele Meyer, Sabine Bartholomeyczik, Margareta Halek

Abstract

The QUALIDEM is a dementia-specific Quality of life (Qol) instrument that is recommended for longitudinal studies and advanced stages of dementia. Our study aimed to develop a user guide for the German version of the QUALIDEM and to determine the item distribution, internal consistency and inter-rater reliability (IRR) of the German QUALIDEM. A user guide was developed based on cognitive interviews with ten professional caregivers and a focus group with six professional caregivers. The item distribution, internal consistency and IRR were evaluated through a field test including n = 55 (mild to severe dementia) and n = 36 (very severe dementia) residents from nine nursing homes. Individuals with dementia were assessed four times by blinded proxy raters. A user guide with instructions for the application of the QUALIDEM and definitions and examples for each item was created. Based on the single-measure intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC for absolute agreement), we observed strong IRR for nearly all of the QUALIDEM subscales, with ICCs of at least 0.79. A lower ICC (ICC = 0.64) was only obtained for people with very severe dementia on the 'negative affect' subscale. The IRR improved based on the application of the QUALIDEM user guide developed in this study. We demonstrated a sufficient IRR for all subscales of the German version of the QUALIDEM, with the exception of the 'negative affect' subscale in the subsample of people with very severe dementia. The item distribution and internal consistency results highlight the need to develop new informative items for some subscales.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 20%
Researcher 8 16%
Student > Bachelor 7 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 11 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 15 30%
Psychology 9 18%
Social Sciences 4 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 12 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 15 July 2016.
All research outputs
#4,191,823
of 22,880,691 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#1,107
of 3,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,826
of 353,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#14
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,691 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,204 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 64% 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 353,577 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.