. "6. Screening and Case Identification in Clinical Settings." Elder Mistreatment: Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation in an Aging America. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2003.
The following HTML text is provided to enhance online
readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML.
Please use the page image
as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.
Elder Mistreatment: Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation in an Aging America
Evaluation
Validation Method
Validation Setting
Reliability Estimates
Fulmer and O’Malley (1987)
Content validity: 0.83
Acute care.
Chronbach’s alpha = 0.84
Reis and Namiash (1995)
Predictive Validity
Using known abusers and a control groups, overall scores of abusers were significantly higher on the CASE (mean 3.2) than nonabusers (mean 1.9).
Construct Validity
CASE scores were positively correlated (0.41) with IOA scores.
44 known abusive caregivers and 45 nonabusive caregivers receiving care from a social services center.
Chronbach’s alpha = 0.71
present in the domains of subject, trusted other, and social embeddedness (see Chapter 3).
Challenges in Screening
A variety of factors make screening challenging and difficult. Mistreatment may occur as a single act or as a chronic, subtle series of events. In fact it is often difficult to know when an event or series of events have crossed the line from inappropriate conduct to actual mistreatment. At what point does inadequate care become intentional neglect? Expectations across different settings may also influence the identification and definition of cases. For example, different standards of care may be applied to the professional staff of a nursing home in contrast to a family caregiver or
