4.1 Article

Validity and Reliability of the Korean Version of the AD8 Informant Interview (K-AD8) in Dementia

Journal

ALZHEIMER DISEASE & ASSOCIATED DISORDERS
Volume 23, Issue 4, Pages 371-376

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/WAD.0b013e31819e6881

Keywords

AD8; brief informant-based measure; very mild dementia; mild cognitive impairment; validity; reliability; K-AD8

Funding

  1. Korea Health 21 RD Project
  2. Ministry of Health and Welfare, Republic of Korea [A050079]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Alzheimer disease 8 (AD8) is a brief informant-based measure that distinguishes individuals with very mild dementia and mild cognitive impairment from those with normal cognition. The aim of this study was to establish the validity, reliability, and discriminative properties of the Korean version of the AD8 (K-AD8). Evaluation was made oil 155 patient-informant dyads. The K-AD8 scores with the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) and performance on neuropsychologic tests were compared. Internal consistency of the K-AD8 was significant (Cronbach alpha = 0.88). The K-AD8 had strong correlation with CDR (Spear-mail rho = 0.76). Concurrent validity was strong with the K-ADS scores correlating with CDR domains and performance on neuropsychologic tests. The K-AD8 wits found to have excellent test-retest reliability (weighted kappa = 0.81) and good interrater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.89). The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve was 0.88, suggesting good discrimination between nondemented individuals and those with cognitive impairment. To distinguish CDR 0.5 from CDR 0, in particular, the K-AD8 (cutoff score of 2) had it sensitivity of 68% and it specificity of 90%. In conclusion, the K-ADS is a sensitive screening tool in detecting very early dementia, indicating that the AD8 could work very well in a variety Of Cultural entities.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available