A Clinical Utility Study on the Korean Version of the Older Adult Behavior Checklist

2020 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-85
Author(s):  
Subin Cho ◽  
Jung-Ae Lee ◽  
Kang-Seob Oh
2017 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 283-290
Author(s):  
김다정 ◽  
이동우 ◽  
Kyung-Ja Oh ◽  
CHOI, JI YOUNG
Keyword(s):  

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 235-245 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. G. Quinn ◽  
L. A. Rabin ◽  
G. C. Sprehn

Purpose: Older adults have an increased likelihood of requiring rehabilitative care due to cognitive and physical risk factors. Research has found a link between executive functioning performance and functional outcomes; however, there is a dearth of research on the assessment of judgement ability. In the current pilot study, we investigated the clinical utility of the Test of Practical Judgment (TOP-J) in an older adult rehabilitation sample.Methods: Inpatients of mixed diagnoses (n= 25, mean age = 72.60) completed the TOP-J and Functional Independence Measure (FIM). We assessed TOP-J performance in the entire sample and in those with intact vs. impaired global cognition (on the Mini-Mental State Examination; MMSE). Correlational analyses were conducted between the TOP-J, MMSE and relevant FIM items.Results: TOP-J performance fell between the means typically observed in individuals with mild cognitive impairment and mild Alzheimer's disease. Participants with intact global cognition obtained significantly higher TOP-J scores than those with impaired global cognition. Moderate to strong positive correlations emerged between TOP-J, MMSE and FIM items of problem solving, comprehension and memory.Conclusions: Results provide support for the clinical utility and validity of the TOP-J among older adults in the rehabilitation setting. Administering the TOP-J may help identify patients at risk for future injury and facilitate role transitions.


2020 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
L.A. Rescorla ◽  
M.Y. Ivanova ◽  
T.M. Achenbach ◽  
Vera Almeida ◽  
Meltem Anafarta-Sendag ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT Objectives: To conduct international comparisons of self-reports, collateral reports, and cross-informant agreement regarding older adult psychopathology. Participants: We compared self-ratings of problems (e.g. I cry a lot) and personal strengths (e.g. I like to help others) for 10,686 adults aged 60–102 years from 19 societies and collateral ratings for 7,065 of these adults from 12 societies. Measurements: Data were obtained via the Older Adult Self-Report (OASR) and the Older Adult Behavior Checklist (OABCL; Achenbach et al., 2004). Results: Cronbach’s alphas were .76 (OASR) and .80 (OABCL) averaged across societies. Across societies, 27 of the 30 problem items with the highest mean ratings and 28 of the 30 items with the lowest mean ratings were the same on the OASR and the OABCL. Q correlations between the means of the 0–1–2 ratings for the 113 problem items averaged across all pairs of societies yielded means of .77 (OASR) and .78 (OABCL). For the OASR and OABCL, respectively, analyses of variance (ANOVAs) yielded effect sizes (ESs) for society of 15% and 18% for Total Problems and 42% and 31% for Personal Strengths, respectively. For 5,584 cross-informant dyads in 12 societies, cross-informant correlations averaged across societies were .68 for Total Problems and .58 for Personal Strengths. Mixed-model ANOVAs yielded large effects for society on both Total Problems (ES = 17%) and Personal Strengths (ES = 36%). Conclusions: The OASR and OABCL are efficient, low-cost, easily administered mental health assessments that can be used internationally to screen for many problems and strengths.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document