Cargando…
A systematic review and psychometric evaluation of resilience measurement scales for people living with dementia and their carers
Psychometrically sound resilience outcome measures are essential to establish how health and care services or interventions can enhance the resilience of people living with dementia (PLWD) and their carers. This paper systematically reviews the literature to identify studies that administered a resi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9675235/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36402942 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01747-x |
_version_ | 1784833328141041664 |
---|---|
author | Windle, Gill MacLeod, Catherine Algar-Skaife, Katherine Stott, Joshua Waddington, Claire Camic, Paul M. Sullivan, Mary Pat Brotherhood, Emilie Crutch, Sebastian |
author_facet | Windle, Gill MacLeod, Catherine Algar-Skaife, Katherine Stott, Joshua Waddington, Claire Camic, Paul M. Sullivan, Mary Pat Brotherhood, Emilie Crutch, Sebastian |
author_sort | Windle, Gill |
collection | PubMed |
description | Psychometrically sound resilience outcome measures are essential to establish how health and care services or interventions can enhance the resilience of people living with dementia (PLWD) and their carers. This paper systematically reviews the literature to identify studies that administered a resilience measurement scale with PLWD and/or their carers and examines the psychometric properties of these measures. Electronic abstract databases and the internet were searched, and an international network contacted to identify peer-reviewed journal articles. Two authors independently extracted data. They critically reviewed the measurement properties from the available psychometric data in the studies, using a standardised checklist adapted for purpose. Fifty-one studies were included in the final review, which applied nine different resilience measures, eight developed in other populations and one developed for dementia carers in Thailand. None of the measures were developed for use with people living with dementia. The majority of studies (N = 47) focussed on dementia carers, three studies focussed on people living with dementia and one study measured both carers and the person with dementia. All the studies had missing information regarding the psychometric properties of the measures as applied in these two populations. Nineteen studies presented internal consistency data, suggesting seven of the nine measures demonstrate acceptable reliability in these new populations. There was some evidence of construct validity, and twenty-eight studies hypothesised effects a priori (associations with other outcome measure/demographic data/differences in scores between relevant groups) which were partially supported. The other studies were either exploratory or did not specify hypotheses. This limited evidence does not necessarily mean the resilience measure is not suitable, and we encourage future users of resilience measures in these populations to report information to advance knowledge and inform further reviews. All the measures require further psychometric evaluation in both these populations. The conceptual adequacy of the measures as applied in these new populations was questionable. Further research to understand the experience of resilience for people living with dementia and carers could establish the extent current measures -which tend to measure personal strengths -are relevant and comprehensive, or whether further work is required to establish a new resilience outcome measure. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01747-x. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9675235 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-96752352022-11-20 A systematic review and psychometric evaluation of resilience measurement scales for people living with dementia and their carers Windle, Gill MacLeod, Catherine Algar-Skaife, Katherine Stott, Joshua Waddington, Claire Camic, Paul M. Sullivan, Mary Pat Brotherhood, Emilie Crutch, Sebastian BMC Med Res Methodol Research Psychometrically sound resilience outcome measures are essential to establish how health and care services or interventions can enhance the resilience of people living with dementia (PLWD) and their carers. This paper systematically reviews the literature to identify studies that administered a resilience measurement scale with PLWD and/or their carers and examines the psychometric properties of these measures. Electronic abstract databases and the internet were searched, and an international network contacted to identify peer-reviewed journal articles. Two authors independently extracted data. They critically reviewed the measurement properties from the available psychometric data in the studies, using a standardised checklist adapted for purpose. Fifty-one studies were included in the final review, which applied nine different resilience measures, eight developed in other populations and one developed for dementia carers in Thailand. None of the measures were developed for use with people living with dementia. The majority of studies (N = 47) focussed on dementia carers, three studies focussed on people living with dementia and one study measured both carers and the person with dementia. All the studies had missing information regarding the psychometric properties of the measures as applied in these two populations. Nineteen studies presented internal consistency data, suggesting seven of the nine measures demonstrate acceptable reliability in these new populations. There was some evidence of construct validity, and twenty-eight studies hypothesised effects a priori (associations with other outcome measure/demographic data/differences in scores between relevant groups) which were partially supported. The other studies were either exploratory or did not specify hypotheses. This limited evidence does not necessarily mean the resilience measure is not suitable, and we encourage future users of resilience measures in these populations to report information to advance knowledge and inform further reviews. All the measures require further psychometric evaluation in both these populations. The conceptual adequacy of the measures as applied in these new populations was questionable. Further research to understand the experience of resilience for people living with dementia and carers could establish the extent current measures -which tend to measure personal strengths -are relevant and comprehensive, or whether further work is required to establish a new resilience outcome measure. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01747-x. BioMed Central 2022-11-19 /pmc/articles/PMC9675235/ /pubmed/36402942 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01747-x Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Windle, Gill MacLeod, Catherine Algar-Skaife, Katherine Stott, Joshua Waddington, Claire Camic, Paul M. Sullivan, Mary Pat Brotherhood, Emilie Crutch, Sebastian A systematic review and psychometric evaluation of resilience measurement scales for people living with dementia and their carers |
title | A systematic review and psychometric evaluation of resilience measurement scales for people living with dementia and their carers |
title_full | A systematic review and psychometric evaluation of resilience measurement scales for people living with dementia and their carers |
title_fullStr | A systematic review and psychometric evaluation of resilience measurement scales for people living with dementia and their carers |
title_full_unstemmed | A systematic review and psychometric evaluation of resilience measurement scales for people living with dementia and their carers |
title_short | A systematic review and psychometric evaluation of resilience measurement scales for people living with dementia and their carers |
title_sort | systematic review and psychometric evaluation of resilience measurement scales for people living with dementia and their carers |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9675235/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36402942 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01747-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT windlegill asystematicreviewandpsychometricevaluationofresiliencemeasurementscalesforpeoplelivingwithdementiaandtheircarers AT macleodcatherine asystematicreviewandpsychometricevaluationofresiliencemeasurementscalesforpeoplelivingwithdementiaandtheircarers AT algarskaifekatherine asystematicreviewandpsychometricevaluationofresiliencemeasurementscalesforpeoplelivingwithdementiaandtheircarers AT stottjoshua asystematicreviewandpsychometricevaluationofresiliencemeasurementscalesforpeoplelivingwithdementiaandtheircarers AT waddingtonclaire asystematicreviewandpsychometricevaluationofresiliencemeasurementscalesforpeoplelivingwithdementiaandtheircarers AT camicpaulm asystematicreviewandpsychometricevaluationofresiliencemeasurementscalesforpeoplelivingwithdementiaandtheircarers AT sullivanmarypat asystematicreviewandpsychometricevaluationofresiliencemeasurementscalesforpeoplelivingwithdementiaandtheircarers AT brotherhoodemilie asystematicreviewandpsychometricevaluationofresiliencemeasurementscalesforpeoplelivingwithdementiaandtheircarers AT crutchsebastian asystematicreviewandpsychometricevaluationofresiliencemeasurementscalesforpeoplelivingwithdementiaandtheircarers AT windlegill systematicreviewandpsychometricevaluationofresiliencemeasurementscalesforpeoplelivingwithdementiaandtheircarers AT macleodcatherine systematicreviewandpsychometricevaluationofresiliencemeasurementscalesforpeoplelivingwithdementiaandtheircarers AT algarskaifekatherine systematicreviewandpsychometricevaluationofresiliencemeasurementscalesforpeoplelivingwithdementiaandtheircarers AT stottjoshua systematicreviewandpsychometricevaluationofresiliencemeasurementscalesforpeoplelivingwithdementiaandtheircarers AT waddingtonclaire systematicreviewandpsychometricevaluationofresiliencemeasurementscalesforpeoplelivingwithdementiaandtheircarers AT camicpaulm systematicreviewandpsychometricevaluationofresiliencemeasurementscalesforpeoplelivingwithdementiaandtheircarers AT sullivanmarypat systematicreviewandpsychometricevaluationofresiliencemeasurementscalesforpeoplelivingwithdementiaandtheircarers AT brotherhoodemilie systematicreviewandpsychometricevaluationofresiliencemeasurementscalesforpeoplelivingwithdementiaandtheircarers AT crutchsebastian systematicreviewandpsychometricevaluationofresiliencemeasurementscalesforpeoplelivingwithdementiaandtheircarers |