Home › Research › Health systems and care delivery
Observed affect in nursing home residents with Alzheimer's disease
Lawton MP, Van Haitsma K, Klapper J.. The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences, 1996-01-01
Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology
Plain-language summary
A method for assessing affect states among older people with Alzheimer's disease was developed for use in a study designed to evaluate a special care unit for such residents of a nursing home. The 6-item Philadelphia Geriatric Center Affect Rating Scale was designed for the use of research and other staff in assessing positive affect (pleasure, interest, contentment) and negative affect (sadness, worry/anxiety, and anger) by direct observation of facial expression, body movement, and other cues that do not depend on self-report, among 253 demented and 43 nondemented residents. Each affect scale was highly reliable, expressed in estimated portions of a 10-minute observation period when the affect expression occurred. Validity estimates were affirmative in showing discriminant correlations between the positive states and various independent measures of social and other outwardly engaged behavior and between negative states and other measures of depression, anger, anxiety, and withdrawal. Limited support for the two-factor dimensionality of the affect ratings was obtained, although positive and negative affect were correlated, rather than independent. Some hope is offered that the preference and aversions of Alzheimer patients may be better understood by observations of their emotional behaviors and that such methods may lead to a better ability to judge institutional quality.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Lawton, M. P., Van Haitsma, K., & Klapper, J. (1996). Observed affect in nursing home residents with Alzheimer's disease. The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/51b.1.p3
Vancouver
Lawton MP, Van Haitsma K, Klapper J. Observed affect in nursing home residents with Alzheimer's disease. The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences. 1996. doi:10.1093/geronb/51b.1.p3. PMID: 8548515.
BibTeX
@article{lawton1996-8548515,
author = {Lawton, M. P. and Van Haitsma, K. and Klapper, J.},
title = {{Observed affect in nursing home residents with Alzheimer's disease}},
journal = {The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences},
year = {1996},
doi = {10.1093/geronb/51b.1.p3},
pmid = {8548515},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/51b.1.p3}
}
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 6-item Philadelphia Geriatric Center Affect Rating Scale was designed for the use of research and other staff in assessing positive affect (pleasure, interest, contentment) and negative affect (sadness, worry/anxiety, and anger) by direct observation of facial expression, body movement, and other cues that do not depend on self-report, among 253 demented and 43 nondemented residents.
- Each affect scale was highly reliable, expressed in estimated portions of a 10-minute observation period when the affect expression occurred.
- Validity estimates were affirmative in showing discriminant correlations between the positive states and various independent measures of social and other outwardly engaged behavior and between negative states and other measures of depression, anger, anxiety, and withdrawal.
- Limited support for the two-factor dimensionality of the affect ratings was obtained, although positive and negative affect were correlated, rather than independent.
- Some hope is offered that the preference and aversions of Alzheimer patients may be better understood by observations of their emotional behaviors and that such methods may lead to a better ability to judge institutional quality.
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 41/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 24 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 41 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| 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 | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 1996 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| 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 | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (pubmed indexes it as a clinical or observational study) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 8548515) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 24 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 24 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 41 out of 100. |
| Total | 41 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Health systems and care delivery from nearby years
Also tagged “assisted-living”
199 studies in the library carry the topic tag “assisted-living”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 199 tagged studies.