Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLevene, T
dc.contributor.authorLivingston, G
dc.contributor.authorBanerjee, S
dc.contributor.authorSommerlad, A
dc.date.accessioned2022-04-22T11:20:30Z
dc.date.available2022-04-22T11:20:30Z
dc.date.issued2022-03-29
dc.identifier.issn2044-6055
dc.identifier.issn2044-6055
dc.identifier.othere058252
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/19041
dc.description.abstract

<jats:sec><jats:title>Objectives</jats:title><jats:p>Good social functioning is important for people living with dementia and their families. The Social Functioning in Dementia Scale (SF-DEM) is a valid and reliable instrument measuring social functioning in dementia. However the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) has not yet been derived for SF-DEM. This study aims to define the MCID for the SF-DEM.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Design</jats:title><jats:p>We used triangulation, incorporating data from a cross-sectional study to calculate the MCID using distribution-based and anchor-based methods, and a Delphi survey.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Setting and participants</jats:title><jats:p>The cross-sectional survey comprised 299 family carers of people with dementia. Twenty dementia experts (researchers, clinicians, family carers) rated whether changes on clinical vignettes represented a meaningful change in the Delphi survey.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Primary outcome measures</jats:title><jats:p>We calculated the distribution-based MCID as 0.5 of an SD for each of the three SF-DEM domains (1—spending time with others, 2—communicating with others, 3—sensitivity to others). We used the carers’ rating of social functioning to calculate the anchor-based MCID. For the Delphi survey, we defined consensus as ≥75% agreement. Where there was lack of consensus, experts were asked to complete a further survey round.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results</jats:title><jats:p>We found that 0.5 SD of SF-DEM was 1.9 points, 2.2 and 1.4 points in domains 1, 2 and 3, respectively. Using the anchoring analysis, the MCIDs were 1.7 points, 1.7 points, and 0.9 points in domains 1, 2 and 3, respectively. The Delphi method required two rounds. In the second round, a consensus was reached that a 2-point change was considered significant in all three domains, but no consensus was reached on a 1-point change.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title><jats:p>By triangulating all three methods, the SF-DEM’s MCIDs were 1.9, 2.0 and 1.4 points for domains 1, 2 and 3, respectively. For individuals, these values should be rounded to a 2-point change for each domain.</jats:p></jats:sec>

dc.format.extente058252-e058252
dc.format.mediumElectronic
dc.languageen
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherBMJ Publishing Group
dc.subjectdementia
dc.subjectdelirium & cognitive disorders
dc.subjectepidemiology
dc.subjectold age psychiatry
dc.titleMinimum clinically important difference of the Social Functioning in Dementia Scale (SF-DEM): cross-sectional study and Delphi survey
dc.typejournal-article
dc.typeArticle
plymouth.author-urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35351729
plymouth.issue3
plymouth.volume12
plymouth.publisher-urlhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058252
plymouth.publication-statusPublished
plymouth.journalBMJ Open
dc.identifier.doi10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058252
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health/Peninsula Medical School
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health/Peninsula Medical School/PMS - Manual
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA03 Allied Health Professions, Dentistry, Nursing and Pharmacy
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Academics
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Researchers in ResearchFish submission
dc.publisher.placeEngland
dcterms.dateAccepted2022-03-07
dc.rights.embargodate2022-4-23
dc.identifier.eissn2044-6055
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot known
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058252
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV