Introductory to Issue 40(4): Growing Our Assessment Toolbox

Fellow clinical gerontologists

Articles in this issue focus on translation and refinement of existing scales as well as development of new scales. Each paper includes the scale when possible to aid you in using the scale in clinical and research settings.

The Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) is a staple of clinical practice. Yesavage and Sheikh’s (Yesavage & Sheikh, 1986) publication of the GDS in Clinical Gerontologist, remains our most highly cited paper of all time. In this issue, Sugishita et al from Tokyo, Japan (Sugishita, Sugishita, Hemmi, Asada, & Tanigawa, 2017) present their translation of the scale into Japanese, along with their reliability and validity studies (N = 128). We hope this translation will likewise serve our colleagues in Japan. Similarly, López Ramos and colleagues from Madrid, Spain (López Ramos, Fernández Muñoz, Navarro-Pardo, & Murphy, 2017) present their factor analytic analysis (N = 991) of a Spanish version of the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS), with factors representing social support from family, friends, and others.

Beyond translation, how do you assess older adults whose language and/or literacy skills are limited? I’m enthusiastic about Rosli et al’s (Rosli et al., 2017) comparison of the Identification and Intervention for Dementia in Elderly Africans (IDEA) Cognitive Screen developed for dementia in a low-literacy settings (Gray et al., 2014) and the Picture-Based Memory Impairment Scale (PMIS) developed for those with little to no formal education (Verghese et al., 2012) to the Mini Mental State Examination (Folstein, Folstein, & McHugh, 1975). Their results, from Malaya, Malaysia suggest clinical equivalency without educational bias. It would be great to have more cross-language and cross-national comparisons of scales with little to no literacy requirements.

Years ago, when I encountered hoarding in the clinical setting, there was a common response of throwing up of one’s hands—we had little science or practical tools at our disposal. Now, Hoarding is characterized in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (American Psychiatric Association, 2013), and we increasingly have assessment and treatment tools to help. Vandyke and Steffen (VanDyke & Steffen, 2017) bring us a 6 item scale to evaluate hoarding behaviors related to leftover and expired medications, adapted from the work of Frost and colleagues (Frost, Steketee, & Grisham, 2004) in a sample of older adults (N = 119). This brief scale will no doubt be useful in addressing hoarding of medication. Our recent special issue on Anxiety (Issue three of 2017), also featured a psychometric evaluation of a hoarding-related scale (Ayers, Dozier, & Mayes, 2017).

Of course, many of us who work with older adults work also with caregivers. There are a number of existing scales to assess caregiver burden, which are nicely reviewed by Sadak and colleagues (Sadak et al., 2017). They go on to present their psychometric analyses of the Kingston Caregiver Stress Scale in dementia caregivers (N = 227), aiming for a scale that is brief, multi-dimensional, and uses neutral language suitable for diverse populations seen in primary care settings. Later in the “New and Emerging Professionals” section of this issue we have a second paper focusing on caregiver assessment. O’Malley and Qualls (O’Malley & Qualls, 2017) describe their rather herculean efforts to develop a caregiver reaction scale in family caregivers (N = 502) that captures positive and stressful aspects of the caregiver experience.

Building upon this focus on positive aspects of human experience, in our clinical comment section, McGee and colleagues (McGee, Zhao, Myers, & Kim, 2017) describe preliminary work (N = 36) to assess the utility of measures of positive psychology in older adults with dementia. The consider psychometric characteristics of scales adapted for adults with dementia in the domains of gratitude, life satisfaction, meaning in life, optimism, and resilience. The paper is dedicated to their colleague Richard Taylor (1943–2015), a psychologist and advocate, whom himself was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease. Hopefully this paper plants a seed which will germinate into more work in this essential aspect of living with dementia.

In our New and Emerging Professionals section, we have the aforementioned paper by O’Malley and Qualls. In addition, Midden and Mast (Midden & Mast, 2017) describe their analyses (N = 304) of the Frontal Systems Behavior Scale (Grace & Malloy, 2001) to identify the 18 best items for an older adult population. They separate out items that function well from those that function poorly in the area of apathy, disinhibition, and executive dysfunction.

In 2017 we will be awarding our first annual award for the best paper by a New and Emerging professional based primarily on work by a student at the undergraduate, graduate, or postdoctoral level. We are excited to be able to further showcase the strong work by early career professionals.