A Preliminary Assessment of the Psychometric Properties of a New Communication Aid to Support Assessments of Financial Decision-Making Capacity in People with Aphasia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Financial decision-making is complex and requires an in-depth assessment. In the presence of communication disorders, like aphasia, such assessments become challenging and require the use of a dedicated communication aid. No communication aid currently exists to support financial decision-making capacity (DMC) assessments for persons with aphasia (PWA).(1) We sought to establish the validity, reliability, and feasibility of a newly constructed communication aid desigqned for this purpose. Methods A mixed methods study was performed, divided into three phases. Phase one was aimed at capturing current understanding of DMC and communication by community-dwelling seniors, using focus groups. The second phase involved the development of a new communication aid to assist with the assessment of financial DMC for PWA. The third phase aimed to establish the psychometric properties of this new visual communication aid. Results The new communication aid is a 37-page, paper-based document, with 34 picture-based questions. Due to unforeseen difficulties in participant recruitment for evaluating the communication aid, a preliminary evaluation was performed on the results from eight participants. These indicated the com-munication aid had moderate inter-rater reliability (Gwet’s AC1 kappa of 0.51 [CI 0.4362 to 0.5816, p < .000]), good internal consistency (0.76), and was usable. Conclusions This newly developed communication aid is one of a kind, and provides essential support for PWA requiring a financial DMC assessment, which was not previously available. Preliminary evaluation of its psychometric properties is promising; however, further validation is required to confirm its validity and reliability in the proposed sample size.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".