Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T21:01:00.928Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Convening Expert Panels to Identify Mental Capacity Assessment Items*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2010

Gary Naglie ,
Michel Silberfeld ,
Keith O'Rourke ,
Bruce Fried ,
Nancy Durham ,
Claire Bombardier  and
Allan Detsky
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The objective of this study was to attempt to develop an index of assessment items important to most, if not all, mental capacity determinations. A group process, judgmental method was used. Three separate panels of multidisciplinary experts were assembled to define relevant assessment items and to assign importance weights to the items. All three panels generated a list of assessment items, but panelists refused to assign importance weights. Four items were identified by all three panels, six were identified by two panels, and three were identified by one panel only. A composite list of mental capacity assessment items was generated, but the study failed to generate a standardized assessment instrument.

Résumé

Cette étude avait pour but d'élaborer un index de critères d'évaluation qui compterait pour la majorité, sinon toutes les déterminations de la capacité mentale. Une méthode fondée sur l'opinion de divers groupes d'experts a été utilisée. Trois groupes distincts d'experts multidisciplinaires ont été formés en vue de définir les critères d'évaluation les plus significatifs et de les coter selon leur importance. Les trois groupes ont produit une liste de critères d'évaluation, mais les experts ont refusé de leur attribuer une cote. Les trois groupes ont établi quatre critères identiques, deux groupes en ont établi six identiques, et un groupe a établi trois autres critères distincts. Une liste composée de tous les critères d'évaluation de la capacité mentale a été produite, mais l'étude n'a pas réussi à établir un outil d'évaluation uniformisé.

Keywords

Mental CapacityCompetencyConsensusJudgmentalMethodCapacité mentalecompétenceconsensusjugementméthode
Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement , Volume 14 , Issue 4 , Winter/hiver 1995 , pp. 697 - 705
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association on Gerontology 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Peters, R., Schmidt, W.C., Miller, K.S.Guardianship of the elderly in Tallahassee, Florida. The Gerontologist. 1985, 25, 532–538.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Weisstub, D. (Committee Chairman). Enquiry of Mental Competency, Final Report. Toronto: Queen's Printer for Ontario, 1990.Google Scholar
3.Stanley, B., Guido, J., Stanley, M. et al. The elderly patient and informed consent: empirical findings. JAMA. 1984, 10, 1302–1306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Myers, B., Barret, C.L.Competency issues in referrals to a consultation — liaison service. Psychosometrics. 1986, 27, 782–789.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Tamb, H.A.Informed consent, memory and age. Gerontologist. 1980, 20, 686–690.Google Scholar
6.President's Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research: Making Health Care Decisions. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1982.Google Scholar
7.Appelbaum, P.S., Roth, L.H.Clinical issues in the assessment of competency. Am J Psychiatry. 1981, 138, 1462–1467.Google ScholarPubMed
8.Hommel, P., Wong, L., Bergman, J.Trends in guardianship reform: implications for the medical and legal professions. Law, Medicine and Healthcare. 1990, 18, 213–226.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Sharpe, G. Guardianship: two models for reform. Health Law Canada. 1983, 4, 1–15.Google ScholarPubMed
10.Appelbaum, P.S., Grisso, T.Assessing patient's capacities to consent to treatment. N Engl J Med. 1988, 319, 1635–1638.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Hoffman, B.Assessing competence to consent to treatment. Can J Psychiatry. 1980, 25, 251–253.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Roth, L.H., Meisel, A., Lidz, C.W.Test of Competency to consent to treatment. Am J Psychiatry. 1977, 134, 279–284.Google Scholar
13.Meisel, A., Roth, L.H., Lidz, C.W.Toward a model of the legal doctrine of informed consent. Am J Psychiatry. 1984, 6, 71–76.Google Scholar
14.Drane, J.F.Competency to give an informed consent: a model for making clinical assessments. J Am Med Assoc. 1984, 252, 925–927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Sherlock, R.Competency to consent to medical care: toward a general view. General Hosp Psychiatry. 1984, 6, 71–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Lieff, S., Maindonald, K., Shulman, K.Issues in determining financial competence in the elderly. Can Med Assoc J. 1984, 130, 1293–1296.Google ScholarPubMed
17.Dickson, M.L.Legal aspects of competence. Health Law Canada. 1982, 3, 69–71.Google Scholar
18.Minetz, M.Informed Consent and incompetent medical patients. J Fam Pract. 1985, 20, 273–279.Google Scholar
19.MacKay, M.J.Financial and personal competence in the elderly: the position of the Canadian Psychiatric Association. Can J Psychiatry. 1989, 34, 829–832.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20.Kline, S.A.The clinical issues of determining competency. Health Law Canada. 1987, 8, 4–8.Google Scholar
21.Gustafson, D.H., Fryback, D.G., Rose, J.H. et al. An evaluation of multiple trauma severity indices created by different index development strategies. Medical Care. 1983, 21, 674–691.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22.Gustafson, D.H., Fryback, D.G., Rose, J.H. et al. A decision theoretic methodology for severity index development. Med Decis Making. 1986, 6, 27–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23.Gustafson, D.H., Holloway, D.C.A decision theory approach to measure severity in illness. Health Serv Res. 1975, 10, 97–106.Google ScholarPubMed
24.Bombardier, C., Tugwell, P., Sinclair, A. et al. Preference for endpoint measures in clinical trials: results of structured workshops. J Rheumatol. 1982, 9, 798–801.Google ScholarPubMed
25.Fryback, D.G., Keeney, R.L.Constructing a complex judgmental model: an index of trauma severity. Management Sci. 1983, 29, 869–883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26.Choi, T., Brekke, M.L., Campion, B.C. et al. Feasibility of simulating physicians' judgments of patient severity. Medical Care. 1984, 22, 30–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
27.Silberfeld, M., Dickens, B., Harvey, W. et al. A competency clinic for the elderly at Baycrest Centre. Advocates Q. 1988, 10, 23–28.Google Scholar
28.Campbell, L.J., Cole, K.D.Geriatric assessment teams. Clin Geriatric Med. 1987, 3, 99–110.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed