评估智力残疾虚弱指数简表的评分者间一致性:一项描述性试点研究。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 EDUCATION, SPECIAL
Journal of Intellectual Disabilities Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-03 DOI:10.1177/17446295231213436
Heather Hirst, Jennifer Campbell, Samantha Chamberlin, Ibukun Olagunju, Frank Bird, James K Luiselli
{"title":"评估智力残疾虚弱指数简表的评分者间一致性:一项描述性试点研究。","authors":"Heather Hirst, Jennifer Campbell, Samantha Chamberlin, Ibukun Olagunju, Frank Bird, James K Luiselli","doi":"10.1177/17446295231213436","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Frailty is a health concern for many adults with intellectual disability and should be measured to detect at-risk conditions, monitor disease, plan treatment, and gauge mortality. This descriptive pilot study evaluated measurement consistency (inter-rater agreement) of the Intellectual Disability-Frailty Index Short Form among multiple assessors with 20 adults (<i>M</i> age = 48.3 years) who had intellectual and multiple disabilities. Agreement percentages were computed for (a) non-frail, pre-frail, and frail categories derived from total index scores, and (b) each of 17 deficits listed on the form. Low average inter-rater agreement (<85%) was obtained on the index frail categories, several of the assessed deficits had acceptable inter-rater agreement (84.2-100%), while the majority of deficits were associated with moderate-to-low agreement percentages. Though research supports the Intellectual Disability-Frailty Index Short Form as a valid and practical frailty assessment instrument, our findings suggest that full-scale inter-rater agreement must be improved by adding more specificity to the form, clarifying instructions for assessors, and providing competency-based training in assessment implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":46904,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Disabilities","volume":" ","pages":"1109-1117"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing inter-rater agreement of the intellectual disability-frailty index short form: A descriptive pilot study.\",\"authors\":\"Heather Hirst, Jennifer Campbell, Samantha Chamberlin, Ibukun Olagunju, Frank Bird, James K Luiselli\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17446295231213436\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Frailty is a health concern for many adults with intellectual disability and should be measured to detect at-risk conditions, monitor disease, plan treatment, and gauge mortality. This descriptive pilot study evaluated measurement consistency (inter-rater agreement) of the Intellectual Disability-Frailty Index Short Form among multiple assessors with 20 adults (<i>M</i> age = 48.3 years) who had intellectual and multiple disabilities. Agreement percentages were computed for (a) non-frail, pre-frail, and frail categories derived from total index scores, and (b) each of 17 deficits listed on the form. Low average inter-rater agreement (<85%) was obtained on the index frail categories, several of the assessed deficits had acceptable inter-rater agreement (84.2-100%), while the majority of deficits were associated with moderate-to-low agreement percentages. Though research supports the Intellectual Disability-Frailty Index Short Form as a valid and practical frailty assessment instrument, our findings suggest that full-scale inter-rater agreement must be improved by adding more specificity to the form, clarifying instructions for assessors, and providing competency-based training in assessment implementation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46904,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Intellectual Disabilities\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1109-1117\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Intellectual Disabilities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17446295231213436\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/3 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SPECIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Intellectual Disabilities","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17446295231213436","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

虚弱是许多智力残疾成年人的健康问题,应该进行测量,以检测风险状况、监测疾病、计划治疗和衡量死亡率。这项描述性试点研究评估了20名患有智力和多重残疾的成年人(男性年龄=48.3岁)的多名评估员对智力残疾脆弱指数简表的测量一致性(评分者之间的一致性)。协议百分比是为(a)根据总指数得分得出的非脆弱、前期脆弱和脆弱类别计算的,以及(b)表格上列出的17个赤字中的每一个(
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessing inter-rater agreement of the intellectual disability-frailty index short form: A descriptive pilot study.

Frailty is a health concern for many adults with intellectual disability and should be measured to detect at-risk conditions, monitor disease, plan treatment, and gauge mortality. This descriptive pilot study evaluated measurement consistency (inter-rater agreement) of the Intellectual Disability-Frailty Index Short Form among multiple assessors with 20 adults (M age = 48.3 years) who had intellectual and multiple disabilities. Agreement percentages were computed for (a) non-frail, pre-frail, and frail categories derived from total index scores, and (b) each of 17 deficits listed on the form. Low average inter-rater agreement (<85%) was obtained on the index frail categories, several of the assessed deficits had acceptable inter-rater agreement (84.2-100%), while the majority of deficits were associated with moderate-to-low agreement percentages. Though research supports the Intellectual Disability-Frailty Index Short Form as a valid and practical frailty assessment instrument, our findings suggest that full-scale inter-rater agreement must be improved by adding more specificity to the form, clarifying instructions for assessors, and providing competency-based training in assessment implementation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
13.30%
发文量
82
期刊介绍: The principal aim of the journal is to provide a medium for the exchange of best practice, knowledge and research between academic and professional disciplines from education, social and health settings to bring about advancement of services for people with intellectual disabilities. The idea of a practice-led journal is both exciting and timely. This journal serves as a medium for all those involved with people with intellectual disabilities to submit and publish papers on issues relevant to promoting services for people with intellectual disabilities.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信