MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410153748 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0322554

A contemporary tool for assessing instrumental activities of daily living: Validation of a caregiver-reported scale for non-institutionalized older adults

2025· article· en· W4410153748 on OpenAlexaff
Zainab Barakat, Hala Sacre, Sarah Khatib, Aline Hajj, Carmela Bou Malham, Chadia Haddad, Rony M. Zeenny, Marwan Akel, Linda Abou‐Abbas, Marc Barakat, Samar Rachidi, Pascale Salameh

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCronbach's alphaActivities of daily livingIntraclass correlationConvergent validityScale (ratio)GerontologyConfirmatory factor analysisExploratory factor analysisClinical psychologyPsychologyPsychometricsMedicineStructural equation modelingPsychiatryInternal consistencyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) refer to activities necessary for independent living, emphasizing community-related tasks. The literature has limited measurement tools that address autonomous living in contemporary communities. Consequently, our study aimed to develop, cross-culturally adapt, and evaluate the psychometric properties of a recently updated IADL scale called the Autonomy in Daily Functioning-Contemporary Scale (ADF-CS). Additionally, it sought to examine the level of agreement between informant reports and self-reports on the ADF-CS. METHOD: Following translation and cross-cultural adaptation, a first cross-sectional study was carried out among 544 family caregivers of community-dwelling older adults to assess the psychometric properties of the ADF-CS. The internal consistency of the scale was evaluated via Cronbach's alpha. Content and convergent validity, factorial analysis-including confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and exploratory factor analysis (EFA)-and known group validity were also assessed. A second cross-sectional study involving 44 paired caregivers and care recipients was conducted to examine the level of agreement in responses to the ADF-CS scale between caregivers and older adults. Response agreement was evaluated through intraclass and Cohen's kappa correlation coefficients. RESULTS: The internal consistency of the ADF-CS and its factors was high (Cronbach's alpha between 0.83 and 0.90). The robust positive correlation between the total ADF-CS score and the ADL score supported the convergent validity of the ADF-CS Arabic version. Moreover, the statistically significant variations in ADF-CS mean scores among various age groups and some chronic disease groups supported the scale's known group validity. The EFA of the ADF-CS yielded a two-factor solution with an eigenvalue exceeding 1, explaining 63.13% of the variance. The CFA demonstrated that all the items in each component fit well with their intended constructs. Additionally, the intraclass and kappa correlation coefficient results were excellent, indicating robust agreement in the responses of caregivers and their respective older adults. CONCLUSION: The Arabic version of the ADF-CS is a reliable and valid informant-reported measure for assessing IADL in older adults living in a contemporary community.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.143
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicOccupational Therapy Practice and ResearchFrench-language works237,207