Reliability Study on the Japanese Version of the Clinician’s Interview-Based Impression of Change

Abstract

Background/Aims: The Japanese version of the Clinician’s Interview-Based Impression of Change plus Caregiver Input (CIBIC-plus J) consists of 3 subscales: Disability Assessment of Dementia Scale (DAD), Behavioral Pathology in Alzheimer’s Disease Rating Scale (Behave-AD), and Mental Function Impairment Scale (MENFIS), as well as the Clinician’s Global Impression of Change (CGIC). While the interrater reliability of CGIC has already been reported, that of the 3 subscales has not. The aim of the present report was to examine the reliabilities of the subscale items and investigate their relationships with CGIC. Methods: Eleven raters who were clinical physicians watched videotapes of 20 patients with Alzheimer’s disease, completed the CIBIC-plus J assessment form, and assigned a CGIC score to the patients. Reliability was assessed using the kappa coefficient. Results: The kappa coefficient of the subscale items was in most instances higher than that of CGIC (0.453) and substantial reliability was observed. The Spearman rank correlation that was calculated between CGIC and the total score change of items was very high for MENFIS (0.990) and DAD (0.910), and moderate for Behave-AD items (0.576). The incidence of comments by the raters was highest for MENFIS (89%), followed by DAD (70%). The incidence was low for Behave-AD items (48%). Conclusion:Based on the results, it is concluded that DAD, Behave-AD, and MENFIS are necessary constituents of CIBIC-plus J, and indispensable for the reliability of CGIC.

Outcome Measures for Parkinson's Disease Dementia: A Systematic Review

“…The CIBIC+, an alternate version of the CIBIC nonspecific to dementia including caregiver input, was used in 3 trials . The Japanese version of the CIBIC+ demonstrated high concurrent validity in AD with the DAD (r = 0.91) and the Mental Function Impairment scale (MENFIS; r = 0.99) . This study also showed low inter‐rater reliability (k = 0.45), but improved inter‐rater reliability when collapsed into a 3‐point scale (improved, no change, or worsened; k = 0.89) .…”

“…The Disability Assessment for Dementia (DAD) scale was used in 4 trials and is a subscale of the Clinician's Interview Based Impression of Change scale (CIBIC) . In AD, the DAD shows high concurrent validity with the Rapid Disability Rating Scale‐2 (r = −0.85) and with the Japanese version of the Clinician Interview Based Impression of Change with caregiver input (CIBIC+) (r = 0.91) . The DAD demonstrates high test‐retest (r = 0.96) and inter‐rater reliability (k = 0.95) in AD, but has not been established for PDD .…”

“…27,28 In AD, the DAD shows high concurrent validity with the Rapid Disability Rating Scale-2 (r = À0.85) 88 and with the Japanese version of the Clinician Interview Based Impression of Change with caregiver input (CIBIC+) (r = 0.91). 50 The DAD demonstrates high test-retest (r = 0.96) and inter-rater reliability (k = 0.95) in AD, but has not been established for PDD. 88 The DAD demonstrated responsiveness in 2 of 4 trials in which it was utilized.…”

“…49 This study suggests a total cut-off score of 133 instead. 49 Overall, the MDRS has been shown to be superior to the MMSE in assessing cognition 50 and, particularly, in detecting frontal lobe dysfunction in PDD. 11 Though not established for PDD, studies in AD show high inter-rater reliability (k = 0.93) 51 and high test-retest reliability (r = 0.97).…”

Does the Use of Nursing-Care Services Reduce the Information about Dementia Patients Provided by Their Caregivers

“…In our previous studies, the concordance rate of the CIBIC-plus rating was relatively high when specialists conducted the rating based on videos of the interviews, indicating that the contents of the patient interviews are important [3,4]. We addressed the issue of how the use of the nursing-care services might affect the CIBIC-plus rating via interview of the caregivers.…”