Psychometric Investigation of the Modified Scales of Independent Behavior-Revised in an Elderly Sample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Psychometric analysis of a modified version of the Scales of Independent Behavior-Revised (mSIB-R) was done by obtaining self- and informant- (e.g., spouse) reports of participants' functioning. Both reports showed excellent reliability, but with lower scores on the informant-reports than on the self-reports. Factor analysis of the mSIB-R resulted in three factors: basic living skills, social/cognitive engagement, and physical/environmental engagement. However, the composition of the factors varied somewhat by report (self or informant). The basic living skills factor on both reports correlated with Lawton and Brody's IADL measure. Investigating the mSIB-R's utility in differentiating among five groups with mild cognitive impairment suggested that informants rated individuals with deficits in multiple cognitive domains (including memory) the lowest across all factors. Self-reports were dependent on the factor in question. These results support the usefulness of the mSIB-R with non-demented elderly adults.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".