Loading…
Application of a Decisional Capacity Assessment for Older Research Participants with Cognitive Impairment
Decisional capacity assessment is important for older adult participants who have cognitive impairment. This paper reports the implementation of the University of California, San Diego Brief Assessment of Capacity to Consent (UBACC) and its potential for practice and research. Nine of the 10 items r...
Saved in:
Published in: | Behavioral sciences 2023-09, Vol.13 (9), p.767 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c448t-88918995a8c1a3d8a7ba7aa1dd912774bdbd554317e0fb9509cdeb45a7b1dfad3 |
container_end_page | |
container_issue | 9 |
container_start_page | 767 |
container_title | Behavioral sciences |
container_volume | 13 |
creator | Xu, Ling Fields, Noelle L. Westmore, Megan R. Daniel, Kathryn M. Troutman, Brooke A. |
description | Decisional capacity assessment is important for older adult participants who have cognitive impairment. This paper reports the implementation of the University of California, San Diego Brief Assessment of Capacity to Consent (UBACC) and its potential for practice and research. Nine of the 10 items remained to use except for adapting the last item. Approximately 130 older adults with cognitive impairment completed the UBACC screening. Item-by-item descriptive statistics, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), group comparisons of each item, as well as total sum scores of the UBACC were conducted. Results showed that the items that were most often answered correctly included item #10 (participant will be paid), item #4 (study is voluntary), and item #5 (can withdraw at any time). Conversely, the items that were most often answered incorrectly included item #9 (not any benefit potentially), item #7 (potential risk or discomfort), and item #6 (tasks during participation). Respondents with mild cognitive impairment had higher correct answer rates than those with advanced cognitive impairment. The UBACC screening tool has relative utility for older participants with cognitive impairment. |
doi_str_mv | 10.3390/bs13090767 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_caa189913a5c4e6bac44dc0a3d92078f</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A766926436</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_caa189913a5c4e6bac44dc0a3d92078f</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A766926436</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c448t-88918995a8c1a3d8a7ba7aa1dd912774bdbd554317e0fb9509cdeb45a7b1dfad3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdklFvFCEQxzdGY5vaFz8BiS_G5CossMCTuZy2XtKkxmjiG5kF9o7L7rLCXk2_vdNuo1Z4GBj-85sBpqpeM3rBuaHv28I4NVQ16ll1WqNd8Vr_eP7P-qQ6L-VAcTSU1Zy-rE64UlJQIU-ruJ6mPjqYYxpJ6giQj8HFgjvoyQYmcHG-I-tSQilDGGfSpUxueh8y-RpKgOz25AvkObo4wTgX8ivOe7JJuzHO8TaQ7TBBzPeRr6oXHfQlnD_as-r75advm8-r65ur7WZ9vXJC6HmltWHaGAnaMeBeg2pBATDvDauVEq1vvZSCMxVo1xpJjfOhFRJ1zHfg-Vm1Xbg-wcFOOQ6Q72yCaB8cKe_sQ719sA65mItxkE6EpgUswTuKaQ2-nu6Q9WFhTcd2CN7hNTL0T6BPT8a4t7t0axmVtaxrioS3j4Scfh5Dme0Qiwt9D2NIx2Jr3ZiGScoFSt_8Jz2kY8Z_WFTIE5qh6mJR7QBvEMcuYWKH04chujSGLqJ_rRqMaARvMODdEuByKiWH7k_5jNr7FrJ_W4j_Bg56uLI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2869252481</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Application of a Decisional Capacity Assessment for Older Research Participants with Cognitive Impairment</title><source>PubMed (Medline)</source><source>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</source><creator>Xu, Ling ; Fields, Noelle L. ; Westmore, Megan R. ; Daniel, Kathryn M. ; Troutman, Brooke A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Xu, Ling ; Fields, Noelle L. ; Westmore, Megan R. ; Daniel, Kathryn M. ; Troutman, Brooke A.</creatorcontrib><description>Decisional capacity assessment is important for older adult participants who have cognitive impairment. This paper reports the implementation of the University of California, San Diego Brief Assessment of Capacity to Consent (UBACC) and its potential for practice and research. Nine of the 10 items remained to use except for adapting the last item. Approximately 130 older adults with cognitive impairment completed the UBACC screening. Item-by-item descriptive statistics, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), group comparisons of each item, as well as total sum scores of the UBACC were conducted. Results showed that the items that were most often answered correctly included item #10 (participant will be paid), item #4 (study is voluntary), and item #5 (can withdraw at any time). Conversely, the items that were most often answered incorrectly included item #9 (not any benefit potentially), item #7 (potential risk or discomfort), and item #6 (tasks during participation). Respondents with mild cognitive impairment had higher correct answer rates than those with advanced cognitive impairment. The UBACC screening tool has relative utility for older participants with cognitive impairment.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2076-328X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2076-328X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/bs13090767</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37754045</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Basel: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Adults ; Aged ; Alzheimer's disease ; assessment ; Brief Report ; Cognitive ability ; Consent ; Decision making ; decision-making capacity ; older adults with cognitive impairment ; Older people ; Portable computers ; Researchers ; UBACC</subject><ispartof>Behavioral sciences, 2023-09, Vol.13 (9), p.767</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2023 MDPI AG</rights><rights>2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2023 by the authors. 2023</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c448t-88918995a8c1a3d8a7ba7aa1dd912774bdbd554317e0fb9509cdeb45a7b1dfad3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-0798-2126</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2869252481/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2869252481?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,25753,27924,27925,37012,37013,44590,53791,53793,75126</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Xu, Ling</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fields, Noelle L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Westmore, Megan R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Daniel, Kathryn M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Troutman, Brooke A.</creatorcontrib><title>Application of a Decisional Capacity Assessment for Older Research Participants with Cognitive Impairment</title><title>Behavioral sciences</title><description>Decisional capacity assessment is important for older adult participants who have cognitive impairment. This paper reports the implementation of the University of California, San Diego Brief Assessment of Capacity to Consent (UBACC) and its potential for practice and research. Nine of the 10 items remained to use except for adapting the last item. Approximately 130 older adults with cognitive impairment completed the UBACC screening. Item-by-item descriptive statistics, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), group comparisons of each item, as well as total sum scores of the UBACC were conducted. Results showed that the items that were most often answered correctly included item #10 (participant will be paid), item #4 (study is voluntary), and item #5 (can withdraw at any time). Conversely, the items that were most often answered incorrectly included item #9 (not any benefit potentially), item #7 (potential risk or discomfort), and item #6 (tasks during participation). Respondents with mild cognitive impairment had higher correct answer rates than those with advanced cognitive impairment. The UBACC screening tool has relative utility for older participants with cognitive impairment.</description><subject>Adults</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Alzheimer's disease</subject><subject>assessment</subject><subject>Brief Report</subject><subject>Cognitive ability</subject><subject>Consent</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>decision-making capacity</subject><subject>older adults with cognitive impairment</subject><subject>Older people</subject><subject>Portable computers</subject><subject>Researchers</subject><subject>UBACC</subject><issn>2076-328X</issn><issn>2076-328X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNpdklFvFCEQxzdGY5vaFz8BiS_G5CossMCTuZy2XtKkxmjiG5kF9o7L7rLCXk2_vdNuo1Z4GBj-85sBpqpeM3rBuaHv28I4NVQ16ll1WqNd8Vr_eP7P-qQ6L-VAcTSU1Zy-rE64UlJQIU-ruJ6mPjqYYxpJ6giQj8HFgjvoyQYmcHG-I-tSQilDGGfSpUxueh8y-RpKgOz25AvkObo4wTgX8ivOe7JJuzHO8TaQ7TBBzPeRr6oXHfQlnD_as-r75advm8-r65ur7WZ9vXJC6HmltWHaGAnaMeBeg2pBATDvDauVEq1vvZSCMxVo1xpJjfOhFRJ1zHfg-Vm1Xbg-wcFOOQ6Q72yCaB8cKe_sQ719sA65mItxkE6EpgUswTuKaQ2-nu6Q9WFhTcd2CN7hNTL0T6BPT8a4t7t0axmVtaxrioS3j4Scfh5Dme0Qiwt9D2NIx2Jr3ZiGScoFSt_8Jz2kY8Z_WFTIE5qh6mJR7QBvEMcuYWKH04chujSGLqJ_rRqMaARvMODdEuByKiWH7k_5jNr7FrJ_W4j_Bg56uLI</recordid><startdate>20230901</startdate><enddate>20230901</enddate><creator>Xu, Ling</creator><creator>Fields, Noelle L.</creator><creator>Westmore, Megan R.</creator><creator>Daniel, Kathryn M.</creator><creator>Troutman, Brooke A.</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><general>MDPI</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0798-2126</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230901</creationdate><title>Application of a Decisional Capacity Assessment for Older Research Participants with Cognitive Impairment</title><author>Xu, Ling ; Fields, Noelle L. ; Westmore, Megan R. ; Daniel, Kathryn M. ; Troutman, Brooke A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c448t-88918995a8c1a3d8a7ba7aa1dd912774bdbd554317e0fb9509cdeb45a7b1dfad3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Adults</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Alzheimer's disease</topic><topic>assessment</topic><topic>Brief Report</topic><topic>Cognitive ability</topic><topic>Consent</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>decision-making capacity</topic><topic>older adults with cognitive impairment</topic><topic>Older people</topic><topic>Portable computers</topic><topic>Researchers</topic><topic>UBACC</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Xu, Ling</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fields, Noelle L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Westmore, Megan R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Daniel, Kathryn M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Troutman, Brooke A.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Science Journals</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Behavioral sciences</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Xu, Ling</au><au>Fields, Noelle L.</au><au>Westmore, Megan R.</au><au>Daniel, Kathryn M.</au><au>Troutman, Brooke A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Application of a Decisional Capacity Assessment for Older Research Participants with Cognitive Impairment</atitle><jtitle>Behavioral sciences</jtitle><date>2023-09-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>13</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>767</spage><pages>767-</pages><issn>2076-328X</issn><eissn>2076-328X</eissn><abstract>Decisional capacity assessment is important for older adult participants who have cognitive impairment. This paper reports the implementation of the University of California, San Diego Brief Assessment of Capacity to Consent (UBACC) and its potential for practice and research. Nine of the 10 items remained to use except for adapting the last item. Approximately 130 older adults with cognitive impairment completed the UBACC screening. Item-by-item descriptive statistics, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), group comparisons of each item, as well as total sum scores of the UBACC were conducted. Results showed that the items that were most often answered correctly included item #10 (participant will be paid), item #4 (study is voluntary), and item #5 (can withdraw at any time). Conversely, the items that were most often answered incorrectly included item #9 (not any benefit potentially), item #7 (potential risk or discomfort), and item #6 (tasks during participation). Respondents with mild cognitive impairment had higher correct answer rates than those with advanced cognitive impairment. The UBACC screening tool has relative utility for older participants with cognitive impairment.</abstract><cop>Basel</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><pmid>37754045</pmid><doi>10.3390/bs13090767</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0798-2126</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2076-328X |
ispartof | Behavioral sciences, 2023-09, Vol.13 (9), p.767 |
issn | 2076-328X 2076-328X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_caa189913a5c4e6bac44dc0a3d92078f |
source | PubMed (Medline); Publicly Available Content (ProQuest) |
subjects | Adults Aged Alzheimer's disease assessment Brief Report Cognitive ability Consent Decision making decision-making capacity older adults with cognitive impairment Older people Portable computers Researchers UBACC |
title | Application of a Decisional Capacity Assessment for Older Research Participants with Cognitive Impairment |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-02T19%3A38%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Application%20of%20a%20Decisional%20Capacity%20Assessment%20for%20Older%20Research%20Participants%20with%20Cognitive%20Impairment&rft.jtitle=Behavioral%20sciences&rft.au=Xu,%20Ling&rft.date=2023-09-01&rft.volume=13&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=767&rft.pages=767-&rft.issn=2076-328X&rft.eissn=2076-328X&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/bs13090767&rft_dat=%3Cgale_doaj_%3EA766926436%3C/gale_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c448t-88918995a8c1a3d8a7ba7aa1dd912774bdbd554317e0fb9509cdeb45a7b1dfad3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2869252481&rft_id=info:pmid/37754045&rft_galeid=A766926436&rfr_iscdi=true |