Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37828448›Full record

ArticleBMC geriatrics2023

Development and validation of the short form domestic elder abuse assessment questionnaire (SF-DEAQ).

Amirreza Zobdeh, Razieh Bandari, Majideh Heravi-Karimooi, Maryam Mashayekh, Maryam Hazrati, Ali Montazeri

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC geriatrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Amirreza ZobdehFaculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Razieh BandariSocial Determinants of Health Research Center, Semnan University of Medical Sciences, Semnan, Iran. r.bandari2314@yahoo.com.
Majideh Heravi-KarimooiElderly Care Research Center, Faculty of Nursing & Midwifery, Shahed University, Tehran, Iran.
Maryam MashayekhAmir-Almomenin Hospital, Busher University of Medical Sciences, Genaveh, Iran.
Maryam HazratiIranian Research Center on Aging, University of Social and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Ali MontazeriPopulation Health Research Group, Health Metric Center, Iranian Institute for Health Sciences Research, ACECR, Tehran, Iran. montazeri@acecr.ac.ir.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe present study aimed to design and determine the psychometric properties of a short-form questionnaire to investigate the domestic elder abuse.

methodsThis study consisted of two phases: in phase 1 we employed a modified Delphi approach with 18 participants. Consequently, content and face validity, and item analysis were applied. In Phase 2 we evaluated structural validity and convergent validity. Reliability was assessed by looking at internal consistency, stability, and absolute reliability.

resultsThe findings led to the development of a 27-items short form of domestic elder abuse in four domains that jointly accounted for 74.14% of the variance observed. The short form showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.93) and significantly correlated (r = 0.91; p < 0.001 for both scales) with the comprehensive (49-item) domestic elder abuse.

conclusionThe short form of domestic elder abuse was found to be reliable and valid as the longer version. The short form of domestic elder abuse could lessen the burden on respondents.

Indexed as

Elder AbuseAgedHumansPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesDevelopmentDomestic elder abuseOlder adultsPsychometricReliabilityValidity

Identifiers

PMID37828448
PMCPMC10571479

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.