MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406780748 · doi:10.1111/1440-1630.13013

A systematic review of psychometric properties of questionnaires assessing activities of daily living among older adults with neurocognitive disorders

2025· review· en· W4406780748 on OpenAlexafffund
Alia Osman, Dennis Radman, Patrícia Belchior, Isabelle Gélinas

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Occupational Therapy Journal · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsActivities of daily livingChecklistCINAHLGerontologyClinical psychologyConstruct validityQuality of life (healthcare)PsychologyPsychometricsDementiaMEDLINENeurocognitiveMedicineCognitionDiseasePsychiatryPsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's disease (AD) lead to decline in performance in activities of daily living (ADLs). Multiple questionnaires assess this construct among older adults. The objective of this study was to review existing literature studying psychometric properties of questionnaires assessing performance in ADLs of older adults living with MCI and AD specifically. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted across Medline, CINAHL and PsychINFO using a combination of keywords related to ADLs, psychometrics, MCI and AD. Studies were included if they met the following criteria: assessments of performance of ADLs for older adults living with AD or MCI, reporting a minimum of one measurement property (e.g. internal consistency), primary research articles, published before June 2023 in English or French. Data extraction and analysis were conducted by two researchers. The methodological quality of psychometric properties was assessed using the COSMIN checklist. CONSUMER AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT: No consumer or community involvement occurred. RESULTS: A total of 2539 articles were screened and filtered down to 50 articles including 24 questionnaires respecting inclusion criteria. Of these questionnaires, the three most validated were the Amsterdam Instrumental activities of daily living, the disability assessment for dementia (DAD), and the Bayer ADL scale. Overall, for these three questionnaires, internal consistency, reliability and structural validity were the most studied psychometric properties while criterion validity and hypothesis testing were the least. CONCLUSION: This study reveals the Amsterdam IADLs as the most validated questionnaire across psychometric properties and the DAD as the most validated across languages. Considering the increasing prevalence of older adults with MCI or AD, questionnaires established on strong measurement properties are valuable tools to evaluate decline in ADL performance and plan suitable interventions. This review provides evidence for clinicians and researchers for the selection of questionnaires to evaluate this population. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Cognitive impairment affects memory and thinking. It makes tasks like dressing, bathing and eating harder. Health-care workers use questionnaires to find out where someone struggles. This helps them plan better care. We reviewed questionnaires for older adults with memory and thinking problems. We found good ones that give important information. Using these questionnaires helps health-care workers support people with daily tasks. This study suggests testing the questionnaires more to improve them.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.980

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.335 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Occupational Therapy JournalSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207