Home > DARE Reviews > Validity, reliability, and feasibility...

PubMed Health. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE): Quality-assessed Reviews [Internet]. York (UK): Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (UK); 1995-.

Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE): Quality-assessed Reviews [Internet].

Validity, reliability, and feasibility of clinical staging scales in dementia: a systematic review

Review published: 2011.

Bibliographic details: Rikkert MG, Tona KD, Janssen L, Burns A, Lobo A, Robert P, Sartorius N, Stoppe G, Waldemar G.  Validity, reliability, and feasibility of clinical staging scales in dementia: a systematic review. American Journal of Alzheimer's Disease and other Dementias 2011; 26(5): 357-65. [PubMed: 21914671]

Abstract

New staging systems of dementia require adaptation of disease management programs and adequate staging instruments. Therefore, we systematically reviewed the literature on validity and reliability of clinically applicable, multidomain, and dementia staging instruments. A total of 23 articles describing 12 staging instruments were identified (N = 6109 participants, age 65-87). Reliability was studied in most (91%) of the articles and was judged moderate to good. Approximately 78% of the articles evaluated concurrent validity, which was good to very good, while discriminant validity was assessed in only 25%. The scales can be applied in ±15 minutes. Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR), Global Deterioration scale (GDS), and Functional Assessment Staging (FAST) have been monitored on reliability and validity, and the CDR currently is the best-evidenced scale, also studied in international perspective, and is available in 14 languages. Taking into account the increasing differentiation of Alzheimer's disease in preclinical and predementia stages, there is an urgent need for global rating scales to be refined as well.

CRD has determined that this article meets the DARE scientific quality criteria for a systematic review.

Copyright © 2014 University of York.

PMID: 21914671

PubReader format: click here to try

PubMed Health Blog...

read all...

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...