MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029801526 · doi:10.1080/13607860410001649644

Special Section—Behavioral symptoms of dementia:their measurement and intervention. Validation of the Algase Wandering Scale (Version 2) in across cultural sample

2004· article· en· W2029801526 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Donna L. Algase, Elizabeth Beattie, Jun‐Ah Song, Doris L. Milke, Christine Duffield, Bronwyn Cowan

Bibliographic record

VenueAging & Mental Health · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsDementiaScale (ratio)Sample (material)PsychologyClinical psychologyIntervention (counseling)Section (typography)GerontologyPsychiatryMedicineGeographyComputer scienceCartographyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined the psychometric properties of an expanded version of the Algase Wandering Scale (Version 2) (AWS-V2) in a cross-cultural sample. A cross-sectional survey design was used. Study subjects were 172 English-speaking persons with dementia (PWD) from long-term care facilities in the USA, Canada, and Australia. Two or more facility staff rated each subject on the AWS-V2. Demographic and cognitive data (MMSE) were also obtained. Staff provided information on their own knowledge of the subject and of dementia. Separate factor analyses on data from two samples of raters each explained greater than 66% of the variance in AWS-V2 scores and validated four (persistent walking, navigational deficit, eloping behavior, and shadowing) of five factors in the original scale. Items added to create the AWS-V2 strengthened the shadowing subscale, failed to improve the routinized walking subscale, and added a factor, attention shifting as compared to the original AWS. Evidence for validity was found in significant correlations and ANOVAs between the AWS-V2 and most subscales with a single item indicator of wandering and with the MMSE. Evidence of reliability was shown by internal consistency of the AWS-V2 (0.87, 0.88) and its subscales (range 0.88 to 0.66), with Kappa for individual items (17 of 27 greater than 0.4), and ANOVAs comparing ratings across rater groups (nurses, nurse aids, and other staff). Analyses support validity and reliability of the AWS-V2 overall and for persistent walking, spatial disorientation, and eloping behavior subscales. The AWS-V2 and its subscales are an appropriate way to measure wandering as conceptualized within the Need-driven Dementia-compromised Behavior Model in studies of English-speaking subjects. Suggestions for further strengthening the scale and for extending its use to clinical applications are described.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.326 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations54
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAging & Mental HealthSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207