New literature review evaluates existing resilience measures used for dementia research

30/10/2022

In recent years, dementia research has shown a stronger emphasis on the concept of resilience. Rather than solely focusing on the deficits brought about by the condition, people with dementia recommend that researchers look at what could help people ‘live as well as possible despite the challenges of the condition’, and at the personal strengths and resources of the individual.
For this reason, many researchers have sought to use resilience as a scale when measuring the impact of various interventions aimed at improving the lives of people with dementia and their carers. Many ways of measuring resilience have been put forward, and it is very important for these resilience measurements to be of quality. In addition to this, most measures of resilience have not been specifically developed for measuring such construct in people with dementia or dementia carers. They, therefore, require careful assessment as to whether they are correctly able to measure resilience in this population group.
The present study, published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, reviewed existing measurements of resilience used in dementia studies, and identified the strengths and limitations of each. A total of 47 studies and 9 different measurement scales were identified. The study authors looked for information about the measures’ content validity (how well a measure covers all relevant parts of the construct it aims to measure), reliability (how well an instrument consistently produces similar results when used by different researchers or at different points in time), and construct validity (how well the test measures what it is meant to be measuring).
The researchers found that all the studies lacked information as to whether the resilience measures possessed the necessary properties for appropriate use in dementia studies. According to the available information, 7 of the 9 measures showed good levels of reliability in populations of people with dementia or their carers, and only 28 studies reported some evidence of construct validity. The study authors concluded that current evidence surrounding the use of existing resilience measures in this population group is very limited. This does not mean that such resilience scales are not suitable to be used in dementia studies, but rather that more research on their properties, when used in the context of dementia, is needed. It is also important for further research to look at how resilience is conceptualised and experienced by people with dementia. This information can serve to evaluate existing resilience scales more precisely, and also pave the way for the development of a new resilience measure specifically designed for people living with dementia.