Search

Background Appropriate conceptualization and measurement of disability are critical for population-focused resource allocation and policy development. Self-reported and performance-based measures of functioning have been used to represent disability. Variation in environmental context or self-perception of ability may influence self-reports; however, performance-based measures that attempt to control environmental context may not accurately capture real-world aspects of functioning. This study examined the agreement between self-report and performance-based measures of functioning within 4 domains among older adults. Methods Cross-sectional data from the 2021 National Health and Aging Trends Study was used. Self-reported and performance-based measures of functioning were assessed for vision, hearing, mobility, and memory domains. We examined the diagnostic characteristics of performance-based versus self-reported measures using sensitivity, specificity, and receiver operating characteristics curves. Differences in the agreement of these measures across sociodemographic groups were investigated using logistic regression. Results Among 2 442 respondents 71 years and older (mean 78.5 ± 5.3, 56% female participants), performance measures of hearing and mobility had high sensitivity (89% and 91%, respectively) and low/moderate specificity (36% and 63%, respectively). The sensitivity and specificity of vision measures were 71%. Memory measures had high specificity (89%) and low sensitivity (28%). Performance-based discrimination ranged from 0.59 (memory) to 0.78 (mobility). Agreement varied across sociodemographic factors. Conclusions Performance measures diverge from self-reported functioning among older adults. Discordance may reveal opportunities for environmental intervention where participants' performance does not capture the full extent of barriers in their daily lives. Additional research is needed to investigate individual and environmental factors which could explain the observed differences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article describes the results of an experiment designed to examine the impact of the use and amount of delayed unconditional incentives in a mixed mode (push to web) supplement on response rates, response mode, data quality, and sample bias. The supplement was administered to individuals who participate in the U.S. Panel Study of Income Dynamics, the longest running national household panel in the world. After 10 weeks of data collection, individuals who had not yet completed the interview were sent a final survey request and randomly assigned to one of three treatment conditions: no incentive, US$5, and US$10. The impact of the incentives on response rates and mode, effects on data quality, and sample bias are described. The implications for the use of incentives in mixed mode surveys and directions for future research are discussed.

Repeated claims that a dwindling supply of potential caregivers is creating a crisis in care for the U.S. aging population have not been well-grounded in empirical research. Concerns about the supply of family care do not adequately recognize factors that may modify the availability and willingness of family and friends to provide care to older persons in need of assistance or the increasing heterogeneity of the older population. In this paper, we set forth a framework that places family caregiving in the context of older adults' care needs, the alternatives available to them, and the outcomes of that care. We focus on care networks, rather than individuals, and discuss the demographic and social changes that may alter the formation of care networks in the future. Last, we identify research areas to prioritize in order to better support planning efforts to care for the aging U.S. population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Adaptive survey designs are increasingly used by survey practitioners to counteract ongoing declines in household survey response rates and manage rising fieldwork costs. This paper reports findings from an evaluation of an early-bird incentive (EBI) experiment targeting high-effort respondents who participate in the 2019 wave of the US Panel Study of Income Dynamics. We identified a subgroup of high-effort respondents at risk of nonresponse based on their prior wave fieldwork effort and randomized them to a treatment offering an extra time-delimited monetary incentive for completing their interview within the first month of data collection (treatment group; N  = 800) or the standard study incentive (control group; N  = 400). In recent waves, we have found that the costs of the protracted fieldwork needed to complete interviews with high-effort cases in the form of interviewer contact attempts plus an increased incentive near the close of data collection are extremely high. By incentivizing early participation and reducing the number of interviewer contact attempts and fieldwork days to complete the interview, our goal was to manage both nonresponse and survey costs. We found that the EBI treatment increased response rates and reduced fieldwork effort and costs compared to a control group. We review several key findings and limitations, discuss their implications, and identify the next steps for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objectives Caregiving research often assumes older adults receiving care have a primary caregiver who provides the bulk of care. Consequently, little is known about the extent to which care responsibilities are shared more evenly within a care network, the characteristics associated with sharing, or the consequences for meeting older adults' care needs. Research Design and Methods We analyze a sample of U.S. older adults receiving care from the 2011 National Health and Aging Trends Study (n = 2,398). Based on variables reflecting differences in care hours, activities, and care provided by the whole network, we create network typologies for those with two or more caregivers (n = 1,309) using K-means cluster analysis. We estimate multinomial and logistic regression models to identify factors associated with network type and the association between type and unmet needs. We conduct analyses overall and for older adults living with and without dementia. Results Analyses reveal four network types: Small, low-intensity shared care network (SCN); large, moderate-intensity SCN; small, low-intensity primary caregiver network (PCN); and moderate-sized, high-intensity PCN. Among all older adults receiving care, 51% have a sole caregiver, 20% have an SCN with no primary caregiver, and 29% have a PCN. Among older adults with dementia receiving intense care, unmet needs are lower among those with an SCN (vs. PCN). Discussion and Implications Findings underscore that the primary caregiver construct, although common, does not apply to a substantial share of care networks. Moreover, having an SCN when needs are high may be beneficial to meeting older adult's needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We describe national trends during the 1990s in late-life difficulty and assistance with self-care activities. Among older Americans living in the community and experiencing difficulty with self-care activities, assistive-technology use increased substantially whereas use of personal care declined. Using a decomposition technique, we demonstrate that these shifts in assistance toward technology account for half the decline in the number of people dependent on personal care. (Contains 3 tables and 2 figures.)

Purpose: This study systematically reviews approaches that national surveys have used to measure the use of assistive devices and examines the implications of these different approaches for prevalence estimates of device use and disability in late life. Design and Methods: Cross-sectional data from six national surveys are used to compare rates of assistive device use and disability among community-dwelling adults aged 65 and older. Results: Estimates of the use of any device are similar across surveys, ranging from 14% to 18% for the population of adults aged 65 and older. However, one survey design element--the restriction of device-use questions to those reporting difficulty with daily activities-omits a potentially sizeable group: those who use devices but report no difficulty. Including this group of device users significantly increases the prevalence estimates of both device use and disability. Implications: The use of assistance and perceptions of difficulty are inextricably interwoven, and attention to the measurement of these concepts is needed. Survey designers may want to consider asking questions about assistive device use independent of questions about difficulty. In addition, researchers who study disability may want to consider including those who report using devices but no difficulty, a group that may become more prevalent as new cohorts age.

Background: Assessing activity limitations is central to aging research. However, assessments of activity limitations vary, and this may have implications for the populations identified. We aim to compare measures of activities of daily living (ADLs) and their resulting prevalence and mortality across three nationally-representative cohort studies: the National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS), the Health and Retirement Survey (HRS), and the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS). Methods: We compared the phrasing and context of questions around help and difficulty with six self-care activities: eating, bathing, toileting, dressing, walking inside, and transferring. We then compared the prevalence and 1-year mortality for difficulty and help with eating and dressing. Results: NHATS, HRS, and MCBS varied widely in phrasing and framing of questions around activity limitations, impacting the proportion of the population found to experience difficulty or receive help. For example, in NHATS 12.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 11.5%–13.4%] of the cohort received help with dressing, while in HRS this figure was 6.4% [95% CI 5.7%–7.2%] and MCBS 5.3% [95% CI 4.7%–5.8%]. When combined with variation in sampling frame and survey approach of each survey, such differences resulted in large variation in estimates of the older population of older adults with ADL disability. Conclusions: In order to take late-life activity limitations seriously, we must clearly define the measures we use. Further, researchers and clinicians seeking to understand the experience of older adults with activity limitations should be careful to interpret findings in light of the framing of the question asked. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The authors examine differences in reports of residual disability and unmet need by type of long-term care arrangement (assistive technology or personal care).Design and Methods: This study compares three specific dimensions of residual difficulty (pain, fatigue, and time intensity) and reports of unmet need across care arrangements. Samples from the U. S. 1994-1995 National Health Interview Survey Phase 2 Disability Supplements include adults with limitations in bathing, transferring, walking, and getting outside. Results: Even when differences in underlying disability are accounted for, assistive technology (AT) confers no additional benefit in the three dimensions of residual difficulty analyzed here. AT users equally or more often report that tasks are tiring, time consuming, or painful, even when they use assistance. Though this would appear to indicate unmet needs for care, fewer AT users report a desire for hands-on personal care. Implications: Though disability alleviation by technology is no better on specific dimensions of difficulty, technology users report less unmet need for personal care. Designing appropriate and cost-effective home care for adults with disabilities requires a better understanding of the ways in which technology users may differ from others and the circumstances under which technology can be most effective.