↓ Skip to main content

Construct validity of the Dining Environment Audit Protocol: a secondary data analysis of the Making Most of Mealtimes (M3) study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
Title
Construct validity of the Dining Environment Audit Protocol: a secondary data analysis of the Making Most of Mealtimes (M3) study
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12877-018-0708-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sabrina Iuglio, Heather Keller, Habib Chaudhury, Susan E. Slaughter, Christina Lengyel, Jill Morrison, Veronique Boscart, Natalie Carrier

Abstract

Research has demonstrated the importance of physical environments at mealtimes for residents in long term care (LTC). However, a lack of a standardized measurement to assess physical dining environments has resulted in inconsistent research with potentially invalid and unreliable conclusions. The development of a standardized, construct valid instrument that assesses dining rooms is imperative to systematically examine physical environments in LTC. The purpose of this study was to determine the construct validity of the new Dining Environment Audit Protocol (DEAP) tool. Secondary data collected from the Making Most of Mealtimes (M3) study was used for this analysis. Data were collected in 32 long term care homes, which included 82 dining rooms and 639 residents. A variety of resident and dining room level constructs were compared to the summative scales found on the DEAP using Spearman correlations and Student t-tests. A regression analysis identified individual characteristics assessed with DEAP that were associated with the summative scales of homelikeness and functionality. Regression analysis (p < 0.05) identified that the DEAP homelikeness scale was positively associated with a view of the garden/green space, presence of a clock and a posted menu. The functionality scale was positively associated with number of chairs and lighting, while negatively associated with furniture with rounded edges and clutter. Additionally, the functionality scale was positively associated (p < 0.05) with the Mealtime Scan physical scale (ρ = 0.52), the dining room Mealtime-Relational Care Checklist (M-RCC) (ρ = 0.25), the DEAP total score (ρ = 0.56), and the Mini Nutritional Assessment- Short Form (ρ = 0.26). Homelikeness was positively associated (p < 0.05) with the DEAP total score (ρ = 0.53), staff Person Directed Care score (ρ = 0.49) and the resident Cognitive Performance Scale (t = 2.56), while negatively associated with energy (ρ = -0.26) and protein intake (ρ = -0.24). The homelikeness and functionality scales were also associated with one another (ρ = 0.26). The construct validity of the DEAP was supported through significant correlations with a variety of measures that are theoretically related to the homelikeness and functionality of LTC dining rooms. This secondary analysis supports the use of the DEAP in future research to quantify the physical environment of LTC dining rooms. Protocol registered with ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02800291; Registered retrospectively June 7, 2016.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 27%
Unspecified 3 20%
Student > Master 3 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Other 3 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 4 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 20%
Social Sciences 3 20%
Psychology 2 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 13%
Other 1 7%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 February 2018.
All research outputs
#1,823,921
of 12,519,038 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#375
of 1,254 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,016
of 342,040 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,519,038 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,254 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 342,040 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them