Department of Emergency Medicine, University of North Carolina, Carrboro, North Carolina, USA.
School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
J Elder Abuse Negl. 2021 Nov-Dec;33(5):385-397. doi: 10.1080/08946566.2021.2003278. Epub 2021 Dec 8.
Developing reliable screening tools to identify elder mistreatment requires an accurate and reproducible reference standard. This study sought to investigate the reliability of the Longitudinal, Experts, All Data (LEAD) methodology as a reference standard in confirming presence of elder mistreatment. We analyzed data from a large, emergency department-based study that used a LEAD panel to determine the reference standard. For this study, a second, blinded LEAD panel reviewed clinical material for 40 patients. For each panel, five content experts voted on whether elder mistreatment was present. We found moderate agreement between the two LEAD panels in determining presence of elder mistreatment: 85% agreement; k = 0.58; 95% Confidence Interval 0.28-0.87. Individual raters for both LEAD panels reported being mostly certain or certain >90% of votes. Efforts to further characterize and improve the reliability of the LEAD methodology in this context are warranted.
开发可靠的筛查工具来识别虐待老年人行为需要一个准确且可重复的参考标准。本研究旨在调查纵向、专家、所有数据 (LEAD) 方法作为确认虐待老年人行为存在的参考标准的可靠性。我们分析了一项大型基于急诊室的研究的数据,该研究使用 LEAD 小组来确定参考标准。在这项研究中,第二个、盲目的 LEAD 小组审查了 40 名患者的临床材料。对于每个小组,五位内容专家投票决定是否存在虐待老年人行为。我们发现两个 LEAD 小组在确定虐待老年人行为存在方面存在中度一致性:85%的一致性;κ=0.58;95%置信区间 0.28-0.87。两个 LEAD 小组的个别评估者报告说,他们对超过 90%的投票非常确定或确定。有必要进一步描述和提高 LEAD 方法在这种情况下的可靠性。