Psychometric Evaluation of an <i>ICF</i> -Based Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Assessment With Older Adults With Cognitive Decline
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Identifying cognitive or physical limitations that contribute to difficulties in instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs) is critical for adequate intervention with community-dwelling older adults with cognitive decline. OBJECTIVE: To establish the validity and responsiveness of an IADL scale based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (the ICF-IADL) with respect to both cognitive and physical limitations. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Multiple community care and senior centers. PARTICIPANTS: Eighty-two older adults. INTERVENTION: Combination of physical exercise and cognitive training. MEASURES: Five criterion measures-Lawton IADL Scale, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSS), Word Lists Test (WLT), and Timed Up and Go Test (TUG). RESULTS: The ICF-IADL's three summary scales-Disability Index (DI), Cognitive Disability Index (CDI), and Physical Disability Index (PDI)-had good concurrent validity with the Lawton IADL Scale. The DI and CDI had moderate to good associations with the MoCA. The DI's and CDI's predictive validity for scores on the Lawton IADL Scale, MoCA, and TUG was moderate to good and that of the PDI was fair. Responsiveness was large for the DI, moderate for the CDI, and small for the PDI. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The ICF-IADL can be used to measure disability in IADLs related to cognitive and physical limitations. The DI and CDI were better than the PDI in predicting outcomes in general cognitive function and dynamic balance and were more responsive to change after intervention than the PDI. WHAT THIS ARTICLE ADDS: The ICF-IADL addresses both cognitive and physical limitations and can be a valid assessment of IADLs. Occupational therapists can use it to determine difficulties in IADLs and causes of those difficulties, guide treatment planning, and monitor intervention effectiveness with community-dwelling older adults with cognitive decline.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".