Development and Validation of the Disability Index Among Older Adults.

Zhang, Xuxi; Lin, Lizi; Sun, Xinying; Lei, Xiaoyan; Liu, Gordon G; Raat, Hein; Zeng, Yi

Development and Validation of the Disability Index Among Older Adults.

dc.contributor.author	Zhang, Xuxi
dc.contributor.author	Lin, Lizi
dc.contributor.author	Sun, Xinying
dc.contributor.author	Lei, Xiaoyan
dc.contributor.author	Liu, Gordon G
dc.contributor.author	Raat, Hein
dc.contributor.author	Zeng, Yi
dc.contributor.editor	Lipsitz, Lewis A
dc.date.accessioned	2023-03-26T21:39:00Z
dc.date.available	2023-03-26T21:39:00Z
dc.date.issued	2023-01
dc.date.updated	2023-03-26T21:38:59Z
dc.description.abstract	Background With the rapid population aging, the challenge to provide care for disabled older adults is becoming bigger. This study aims to develop the Disability Index (DI) to assess disability to indicate care needs, and we evaluated the reliability and validity of the DI among older adults aged 65-105. Methods A total of 12 559 older adults (54.0% women; mean age = 84.3; SD = 11.2) from 22 provinces in China were investigated in 2017-2018. We developed the 21-item DI covering 4 subdomains, including Activities of Daily Living (ADL), Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL), physical performance, and cognitive function. Cronbach's alpha was used to determine internal consistency. The convergent and divergent validity were assessed by Spearman rank order correlation coefficients and Pearson correlation coefficients. The known-group validity was assessed by Mann-Whitney U tests. The concurrent validity was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results In the total sample, the internal consistency of the full DI and its subdomains were satisfactory with Cronbach's alpha ≥0.70; the convergent and divergent validity of the 4 subdomains were supported by all the alternative measures; the known-group validity of the full DI and its subdomains were supported by clear discriminative ability; and the concurrent validity of the full DI was supported with all the AUCs ≥0.70. The reliability and validity of the full DI and its subdomains were additionally supported by age subgroups and sex subgroups. Conclusions The DI is a reliable and valid instrument to assess disability status among older adults.
dc.identifier	6546626
dc.identifier.issn	1079-5006
dc.identifier.issn	1758-535X
dc.identifier.uri	https://hdl.handle.net/10161/26761
dc.language	eng
dc.publisher	Oxford University Press (OUP)
dc.relation.ispartof	The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences
dc.relation.isversionof	10.1093/gerona/glac059
dc.subject	Humans
dc.subject	Disability Evaluation
dc.subject	Activities of Daily Living
dc.subject	Reproducibility of Results
dc.subject	Cognition
dc.subject	Aging
dc.subject	Aged
dc.subject	Aged, 80 and over
dc.subject	Disabled Persons
dc.subject	Female
dc.subject	Male
dc.title	Development and Validation of the Disability Index Among Older Adults.
dc.type	Journal article
pubs.begin-page	111
pubs.end-page	119
pubs.issue	1
pubs.organisational-group	Duke
pubs.organisational-group	Sanford School of Public Policy
pubs.organisational-group	School of Medicine
pubs.organisational-group	Duke Population Research Institute
pubs.organisational-group	Clinical Science Departments
pubs.organisational-group	Institutes and Centers
pubs.organisational-group	Medicine
pubs.organisational-group	Medicine, Geriatrics
pubs.organisational-group	Center for the Study of Aging and Human Development
pubs.organisational-group	Center for Population Health & Aging
pubs.organisational-group	Duke Population Research Center
pubs.publication-status	Published
pubs.volume	78