4.7 Review

A systematic review of 'knowledge of dementia' outcome measures

Journal

AGEING RESEARCH REVIEWS
Volume 11, Issue 1, Pages 67-77

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.arr.2011.09.002

Keywords

Dementia; Alzheimer's; Knowledge; Measure; Outcome; Evaluation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Knowledge of dementia measures are key to identifying areas of misinformation and establishing knowledge levels, thus guiding educational programmes and interventions. A three-step literature search was undertaken to identify measures of knowledge in dementia. An evaluation framework was employed articulating quality indicators for the psychometric properties of measures, based on their development and use within research studies. Five measures were identified: the Alzheimer's Disease Knowledge Test (ADKT, Dieckmann et al., 1988); the University of Alabama Alzheimer's Disease Knowledge Test for Health Professionals (UAB-ADKT, Barrett et al., 1997); the Dementia Quiz (DQ Gilleard and Groom, 1994); the Knowledge of Aging and Memory Loss and Care (KAML-C, Kuhn et al., 2005) and the Alzheimer's Disease Knowledge Scale (ADKS, Carpenter et al., 2009). All measures followed a standard scale development process, generally with acceptable reliability and validity. Many studies used measures on populations beyond the target sample, without re-establishing the psychometric properties of the scales. There are limitations with all the measures, including weaknesses in psychometric properties, being outdated and having limited scope. Although the ADKT was once suited to international use and has established psychometric properties, some items are now outdated. The ADKS positions itself as an updated version of the ADKT, yet has not been used beyond the original development study. The DQ is most the suitable for family carers. All measures require periodic updates, to keep pace with the expanding field of dementia. More robust, contemporary measures of knowledge are required. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available