Race/ethnicity and the measurement of cognition in NSHAP: Recommendations for robustness

James Iveniuk, Selena Zhong, Jocelyn Wilder, Gillian Marshall, Patricia Boyle, Jennifer Hanis-Martin, Louise Hawkley, Lissette M Piedra, Alicia R Riley, Haena Lee
{"title":"Race/ethnicity and the measurement of cognition in NSHAP: Recommendations for robustness","authors":"James Iveniuk, Selena Zhong, Jocelyn Wilder, Gillian Marshall, Patricia Boyle, Jennifer Hanis-Martin, Louise Hawkley, Lissette M Piedra, Alicia R Riley, Haena Lee","doi":"10.1093/geronb/gbae043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives In this study, we examine the measurement of cognition in different racial/ethnic groups to move towards a less biased and more inclusive set of measures for capturing cognitive change and decline in older adulthood. Methods We use data from Round 2 (N=3377) and Round 3 (N=4777) of the National Social Life, Health, and Aging Project (NSHAP) and examine the study’s Survey Adjusted version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA-SA). We employ exploratory factor analyses to explore configural invariance by racial/ethnic group. Using modification indexes, two-parameter item response theory models, and split-sample testing, we identify items that seem robust to bias by race. We test the predictive validity of the full (18-item) and short (4-item) MoCA-SAs using self-reported dementia diagnosis, instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs), proxy reports of dementia, proxy reports of dementia-related death, and National Death Index reports of dementia-related death. Results We found that four measures out of the 18 used in NSHAP’s MoCA-SA formed a scale that was more robust to racial bias. The shortened form predicted consequential outcomes as well as NSHAP’s full MoCA-SA. The short form was also moderately correlated with the full form. Discussion Although sophisticated structural equation modeling techniques would be preferrable for assuaging measurement invariance by race in NSHAP, the shortened form of the MoCA-SA provides a quick way for researchers to carry out robustness checks and to see if the disparities and associations by race they document are “real” or the product of artifactual bias.","PeriodicalId":501650,"journal":{"name":"The Journals of Gerontology: Series B","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journals of Gerontology: Series B","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbae043","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives In this study, we examine the measurement of cognition in different racial/ethnic groups to move towards a less biased and more inclusive set of measures for capturing cognitive change and decline in older adulthood. Methods We use data from Round 2 (N=3377) and Round 3 (N=4777) of the National Social Life, Health, and Aging Project (NSHAP) and examine the study’s Survey Adjusted version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA-SA). We employ exploratory factor analyses to explore configural invariance by racial/ethnic group. Using modification indexes, two-parameter item response theory models, and split-sample testing, we identify items that seem robust to bias by race. We test the predictive validity of the full (18-item) and short (4-item) MoCA-SAs using self-reported dementia diagnosis, instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs), proxy reports of dementia, proxy reports of dementia-related death, and National Death Index reports of dementia-related death. Results We found that four measures out of the 18 used in NSHAP’s MoCA-SA formed a scale that was more robust to racial bias. The shortened form predicted consequential outcomes as well as NSHAP’s full MoCA-SA. The short form was also moderately correlated with the full form. Discussion Although sophisticated structural equation modeling techniques would be preferrable for assuaging measurement invariance by race in NSHAP, the shortened form of the MoCA-SA provides a quick way for researchers to carry out robustness checks and to see if the disparities and associations by race they document are “real” or the product of artifactual bias.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
种族/民族与《国家人类健康行动计划》中的认知测量:关于稳健性的建议
研究目的 在本研究中,我们对不同种族/民族群体的认知测量进行了研究,以制定一套偏差较小、包容性更强的测量方法,用于捕捉老年期认知的变化和衰退。方法 我们使用全国社会生活、健康和老龄化项目(NSHAP)第 2 轮(N=3377)和第 3 轮(N=4777)的数据,并检查该研究的蒙特利尔认知评估(MoCA-SA)调查调整版。我们采用探索性因子分析来探索不同种族/族裔群体的构型不变性。利用修正指数、双参数项目反应理论模型和分割样本测试,我们确定了那些似乎对种族偏差具有稳健性的项目。我们使用自我报告的痴呆诊断、工具性日常生活活动(IADLs)、痴呆的代理报告、痴呆相关死亡的代理报告以及痴呆相关死亡的国家死亡指数报告,检验了完整的(18 个项目)和简短的(4 个项目)MoCA-SAs 的预测有效性。结果 我们发现,在 NSHAP 的 MoCA-SA 中使用的 18 个测量指标中,有 4 个指标形成的量表对种族偏见的影响更强。简表对后果的预测与 NSHAP 的完整 MoCA-SA 一样好。简表与全表也有适度的相关性。讨论 虽然复杂的结构方程建模技术更适合用于确保 NSHAP 的种族测量不变性,但 MoCA-SA 的简表为研究人员提供了一种快速方法来进行稳健性检查,并了解他们记录的种族差异和关联是 "真实的 "还是人为偏差的产物。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Temporary Setback or Lasting Challenge? The Impact of Transient and Persistent Functional disability on later life well-being Context Matters: Internet Usage and Loneliness Among Middle-Aged and Older Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic Worrying Across the Generations: The Impact of Adult Grandchildren’s Problems on Grandparents’ Well-Being The Relationship Between 10-Year Changes in Cognitive Control Beliefs and Cognitive Performance in Middle and Later Adulthood Improving Memory through Better Sleep in Community-dwelling Older Adults: A Tai Chi Intervention Study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1