Validation of an Adapted Version of the Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey for Older Adults Living in Long-Term Care Homes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12) is a generic patient-reported outcome measure of physical and mental health status. An adapted version of the VR-12 was developed for use with older adults living in long-term residential care (LTRC) homes in Canada: VR-12 (LTRC-C). This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric validity of the VR-12 (LTRC-C). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Data for this validation study were collected via in-person interviews for a province-wide survey of adults living in LTRC homes across British Columbia (N = 8,657). Three analyses were conducted to evaluate validity and reliability: (1) confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to validate the measurement structure; (2) correlations with measures of depression, social engagement, and daily activities were examined to evaluate convergent and discriminant validity; and (3) Cronbach's alpha (r) statistics were obtained to evaluate internal consistency reliability. RESULTS: A measurement model with 2 correlated latent factors (representing physical health and mental health), 4 cross-loadings, and 4 correlated items resulted in an acceptable fit (root-mean-square error of approximation = 0.07; comparative fit index = 0.98). Physical and mental health were correlated in expected directions with measures of depression, social engagement, and daily activities, though the magnitudes of the correlations were quite small. Internal consistency reliability was acceptable for physical and mental health (r > 0.70). DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: This study supports the use of the VR-12 (LTRC-C) to measure perceived physical and mental health among older adults living in LTRC homes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".