This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

16/100

⚠ Report — not peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Risk factors

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

The largest increase in the older adult population in U.S. history is something to celebrate—yet, at the same time, current and future trends signal that financial exploitation is, and will continue to be, a significant threat for older adults. Intergenerational wealth is being transferred now at the highest rate in our history, which is a good indicator that the current older generation has significant wealth. A sampling of triggers include: Move to senior housing or assisted living Presentation of self-neglect (i.e., hygiene, grooming, weight loss) Getting lost coming to or becoming disoriented inside the bank Requiring transportation compared to previously being independent Family or others accompanying older adult to bank when they previously did not Repeated questions during interaction Difficulty following directions Older adult unable to recall financial recommendations from prior visit Older adult unable to give good recent history of financial decisions/dealings Trouble with handling paperwork Older adult has no knowledge of a newly issued ATM, debit or credit card Sudden appearance of previously uninvolved relatives claiming their rights to an older adult’s affairs and possessions Large withdrawals from a previously inactive checking or credit account or a new joint account Account use shortly after the addition of a new authorized signer One of the challenges in preventing financial exploitation in older adults is that financial services industry professionals are not equipped to detect capacity concerns as they arise. Contextual factors directly affect the “Current Decision (CD)” associated with decisional abilities when making a sentinel financial transaction or decision. In our first study with the screening scale, we found evidence for criterion-related validity in 69 older adults ( Lichtenberg et al., 2015a ), where the screening scale score was significantly related to neurocognitive tests and money management scales as well as to financial exploitation. With regard to construct validity, we found that the screening scale differentiated those with capacity as judged by frontline professionals from those who did not have capacity, and the scale differentiated those with substantiated financial exploitation (as documented by Adult Protective Services) from those where complaints of financial exploitation went unsubstantiated.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Lichtenberg, P. A. (2016). New Approaches to Preventing Financial Exploitation: A Focus on the Banks. Public Policy & Aging Report. https://doi.org/10.1093/ppar/prv032

Vancouver

Lichtenberg PA. New Approaches to Preventing Financial Exploitation: A Focus on the Banks. Public Policy & Aging Report. 2016. doi:10.1093/ppar/prv032. PMID: 27076776.

BibTeX

@article{lichtenberg2016-27076776,
  author  = {Lichtenberg, Peter Alexander},
  title   = {{New Approaches to Preventing Financial Exploitation: A Focus on the Banks}},
  journal = {Public Policy \& Aging Report},
  year    = {2016},
  doi     = {10.1093/ppar/prv032},
  pmid    = {27076776},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1093/ppar/prv032}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

The largest increase in the older adult population in U.S. history is something to celebrate—yet, at the same time, current and future trends signal that financial exploitation is, and will continue to be, a significant threat for older adults.
Intergenerational wealth is being transferred now at the highest rate in our history, which is a good indicator that the current older generation has significant wealth.
A sampling of triggers include: Move to senior housing or assisted living Presentation of self-neglect (i.e., hygiene, grooming, weight loss) Getting lost coming to or becoming disoriented inside the bank Requiring transportation compared to previously being independent Family or others accompanying older adult to bank when they previously did not Repeated questions during interaction Difficulty following directions Older adult unable to recall financial recommendations from prior visit Older adult unable to give good recent history of financial decisions/dealings Trouble with handling paperwork Older adult has no knowledge of a newly issued ATM, debit or credit card Sudden appearance of previously uninvolved relatives claiming their rights to an older adult’s affairs and possessions Large withdrawals from a previously inactive checking or credit account or a new joint account Account use shortly after the addition of a new authorized signer One of the challenges in preventing financial exploitation in older adults is that financial services industry professionals are not equipped to detect capacity concerns as they arise.
Contextual factors directly affect the “Current Decision (CD)” associated with decisional abilities when making a sentinel financial transaction or decision.
In our first study with the screening scale, we found evidence for criterion-related validity in 69 older adults ( Lichtenberg et al., 2015a ), where the screening scale score was significantly related to neurocognitive tests and money management scales as well as to financial exploitation.

Why it matters

This paper describes triggers that bank staff might notice to help prevent financial exploitation of older adults, including signs such as disorientation or trouble with paperwork. It is about protecting older adults' finances and does not test any treatment, cure, or prevention for Alzheimer's disease.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Risk factors, ranked →

Study details

Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 16/100

Report — not peer-reviewed. It scored 20 on the same rubric, but non-peer-reviewed sources are capped at 16, so it shows as 16. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	2 / 10	Tier 4 — not a peer-reviewed journal (Public Policy & Aging Report)
Journal's citation record	0 / 4	Not a journal article, so the journal's record does not count
Study design	0 / 12	No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence	1 / 5	Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation	3 / 10	Report — not peer-reviewed. Named source is an organisational report, not a journal article.
How recent	1 / 5	2016 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	0 / 4	Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported	0 / 3	No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people	0 / 3	Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Randomised / blinded	0 / 2	No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited	2 / 7	Cited 11 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	0 / 5	0.9 citations a year over 12 year(s) since 2016
Impact for its field and year	3 / 6	Cited 4.7× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	0 / 6	No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited	1 / 4	Cited 4 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	2 / 4	Last-listed author Peter Alexander Lichtenberg: h-index 40 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	1 / 3	Wayne State University: institution h-index 864 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration	0 / 3	OpenAlex lists 1 institution(s) in 1 country — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete)
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 27076776)
Free to read	2 / 2	Free to read
Total	20 / 100	Capped to 16 because this is not a peer-reviewed article.

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.

Related studies in Risk factors

Also in Risk factors

356 studies in the library are filed under Risk factors with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Risk factors hub.

Similar studies

More on Risk factors

See all studies in Risk factors →