| Study, Year |
Population: N
Age
Ethnicity
Socioeconomic Status |
Setting |
Screening Instrument(s) |
Findings |
Quality Rating
Comments |
Caregiver Screen |
| Reis and Nahmiash, 199561 |
N: 139
age: mean 61
ethnicity: NR
socioeconomic status: mean annual income $20,000 |
3 groups of caregivers: 44 abusive and 45 non-abusive from social service agency, 50 non-abusive from community |
CASE, 8 items (yes/no) |
Scores distinguished abusers from non-abusers (Cronbach's alpha = 0.71); other characteristics were similar; CASE scores correlated with IOA (r = 0.41; P <0.001); CASE scores correlated with HSEAST (r = 0.26; P <0.025) |
Fair
Small sample size, administered as part of a social services project, not in a clinical setting |
Elder Screen |
| Neale et al., 199160 |
N: 259
age: mean 77
ethnicity: mostly White
socioeconomic status: NR |
3 groups of elders: 170 victims of abuse, 42 referred to APS and found not to be
abused, 47 from a family practice clinic |
HSEAST, 15 items |
Scores distinguished abused from non-abused (P <0.001; Cronbach's alpha = 0.29);
correctly classified 67%-74% of cases; 6 items were strongly related to abuse | Fair
Small sample size |
| Moody et al., 200066 |
N: 100
age: ≥60
all other demographic
information: NR |
Convenience sample of elderly living in public housing in Florida |
1) HSEAST, 15 items
2) IOA Screen, 29 items |
Scores for abused and non-abused were significantly different (P <0.049); correctly classified 71% of cases; discriminates abuse cases 84.4% of the time and
non-abuse cases 99.2% of the time |
Fair
Small sample size, intended for social service practitioners |
|
Notes: APS, Adult Protective Services; CASE, Caregiver Abuse Screen; HSEAST, Hwalek-Sengstock Elder Abuse Screening Test; IOA, Indicator of Abuse; NR, not reported. |