Validation of apathy evaluation scale and assessment of severity of apathy in Alzheimer's disease

31Citations
Citations of this article
58Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Aim: Apathy is a well-recognized symptom of Alzheimer's disease (AD). The aim of the present study was to validate the Taiwanese version of the Apathy Evaluation Scale, clinician version (AES-C) and assess the severity of apathy in patients with AD. Methods: Comprehensive evaluations were conducted in a total of 144 AD patients. This study used a cross-sectional comparative design. Data were collected from clinical interviews using the AES, the Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE), the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI), and the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale (CDR). Results: Internal consistency was indicated by Cronbach's alphas of 0.85; test-retest reliability was 0.89 over a period of 3 days. Criterion-related validity was supported by the fact that AES-C significantly correlated with the apathy scores of the NPI. Factor analysis indicated a three-factor structure. Convergent validity was supported by a positive correlation between the AES-C score and the anxiety score of the NPI. Discriminant validity was supported by the fact that the AES-C scores did not correlate with the depression subscale of the NPI, and the correlation between the AES-C score and the euphoria score of the NPI score was negative. Known-group validity was supported by results showing that AD patients in a moderate stage of dementia (CDR = 2) had significantly higher scores on the AES-C than patients with mild-stage dementia (CDR = 1). Conclusion: The AES-C is a reliable and valid instrument for measuring symptoms of apathy among AD patients in Taiwan. © 2012 Japanese Society of Psychiatry and Neurology.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hsieh, C. J., Chu, H., Cheng, J. J. S., Shen, W. W., & Lin, C. C. (2012). Validation of apathy evaluation scale and assessment of severity of apathy in Alzheimer’s disease. Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 66(3), 227–234. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1819.2011.02315.x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free