Review of Outcome Measurement Instruments in Alzheimer's Disease Drug Trials: Psychometric Properties of Behavior and Mood Scales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article reviews the reliability and validity of eight scales for behavior and mood problems that were identified in a comparative analysis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) drug trials. The scales are the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-noncognitive, the Relative's Assessment of Global Symptomatology, the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease-Behavior Rating Scale for Dementia, the Dementia Behavior Disturbance scale, the Neuropsychiatric Inventory, and two scales for depressive symptoms, the Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia and the Dementia Mood Assessment Scale. This article also examines methodological limitations in the way the published literature has assessed the psychometric properties of these scales. The aim is to help clinicians and potential trial investigators select appropriate measurement instruments with which to assess behavior and mood problems in AD and to assist AD researchers in the evaluation of the psychometric properties of such scales.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".