Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Are the Items of the Starkstein Apathy Scale Fit for the Purpose of Measuring Apathy Post-Stroke?

Stanley Hum, Lesley K. Fellows, Christiane Lourenco, Nancy E. Mayo
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.05.05.21256484
Stanley Hum
1McGill University, Montreal, Canada
2Montreal Neurological Institute, Montreal, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: Stanley.hum@mcgill.ca
Lesley K. Fellows
1McGill University, Montreal, Canada
2Montreal Neurological Institute, Montreal, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christiane Lourenco
3Escola Superior de Ciências da Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Vitória, Vitória, Brazil
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nancy E. Mayo
1McGill University, Montreal, Canada
4McGill University Health Centre (MUHC), Montreal, Canada
5McGill University Health Centre-Research Institute (MUHC-RI), Montreal, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Given the importance of apathy for stroke, we felt it was time to scrutinize the commonly used Starkstein Apathy Scale (SAS) for psychometric evidence that it is fit for this purpose. The objectives were to: (i) estimate the extent to which the SAS items fit a hierarchical continuum of the Rasch Model; and (ii) estimate the strength of the relationships between the Rasch analysed SAS and converging constructs related to stroke outcomes.

Methods Data on 238 people with stroke (mean age=63.1 years (SD=12.1) women=37.4%) from a clinical trial of a community-based intervention targeting participation were available at 5 time points yielding 856 SAS questionnaires. SAS has 14 items, rated on a 4-point scale with higher values indicating more apathy. Psychometric properties were tested using Rasch partial-credit model, correlation, and regression. The construct was modeled as motivation with items rescored as high is better.

Results Rasch analysis indicated that the response options were disordered for 8/14 items, pointing to unreliability in the interpretation of the response options; they were consequently reduced from 4 to 3. Only 9/14 items fit the Rasch model and therefore suitable for creating a total score. The new rSAS was deemed unidimensional (residual correlations: < 0.3), reasonably reliable (person separation index: 0.74), with item-locations uniform across time, age, sex, and education. However, 30% of scores were >2 SD above the standardized mean but only 2/9 items covered this range (construct mistargeting).

Apathy (rSAS/SAS) was correlated weakly with anxiety/depression and uncorrelated with physical capacity. Regression showed that the effect of apathy on participation and health perception was similar for rSAS/SAS versions: R2 participation measures ranged from 0.11 to 0.29; R2 for health perception was ∼0.25.

When placed on the same scale (0-42), rSAS value was 6.5 units lower than SAS value with minimal floor/ceiling effects. Estimated change over time was identical (0.12 units/month) which was not substantial (1.44 units/year) but greater than expected assuming no change (t: 3.6 and 2.4).

Conclusion The retained items of the rSAS targeted behaviours more than beliefs and results support the rSAS as a robust measure of apathy in people with chronic stroke.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

This project was made possible from funding by the Canada First Research Excellence Fund, awarded to McGill University for the Healthy Brains for Healthy Lives initiative.

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

The McGill University Health Centre Research Ethics Board (MUHC-REB) has approved the original study and the use of the data for this secondary analysis. MUHC Centre for Applied Ethics 5100, boul. de Maisonneuve Ouest, 5th floor, Office 576 Montreal, Quebec, H4A 3T2 telephone: 514-934-1934 ext-34323

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Data Availability

Academic researchers interested in obtaining the data can make a request to the corresponding author. A research proposal would need to be submitted to our Research Ethics Board and a data sharing agreement would be required between the collaborating institutions.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted May 07, 2021.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Are the Items of the Starkstein Apathy Scale Fit for the Purpose of Measuring Apathy Post-Stroke?
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Are the Items of the Starkstein Apathy Scale Fit for the Purpose of Measuring Apathy Post-Stroke?
Stanley Hum, Lesley K. Fellows, Christiane Lourenco, Nancy E. Mayo
medRxiv 2021.05.05.21256484; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.05.05.21256484
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Are the Items of the Starkstein Apathy Scale Fit for the Purpose of Measuring Apathy Post-Stroke?
Stanley Hum, Lesley K. Fellows, Christiane Lourenco, Nancy E. Mayo
medRxiv 2021.05.05.21256484; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.05.05.21256484

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Neurology
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (179)
  • Allergy and Immunology (431)
  • Anesthesia (99)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (943)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (178)
  • Dermatology (109)
  • Emergency Medicine (260)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (420)
  • Epidemiology (8971)
  • Forensic Medicine (4)
  • Gastroenterology (418)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (1938)
  • Geriatric Medicine (190)
  • Health Economics (400)
  • Health Informatics (1323)
  • Health Policy (657)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (517)
  • Hematology (212)
  • HIV/AIDS (416)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (10772)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (571)
  • Medical Education (200)
  • Medical Ethics (54)
  • Nephrology (221)
  • Neurology (1819)
  • Nursing (108)
  • Nutrition (271)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (351)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (469)
  • Oncology (992)
  • Ophthalmology (296)
  • Orthopedics (111)
  • Otolaryngology (182)
  • Pain Medicine (126)
  • Palliative Medicine (44)
  • Pathology (265)
  • Pediatrics (576)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (275)
  • Primary Care Research (234)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (1892)
  • Public and Global Health (4111)
  • Radiology and Imaging (674)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (364)
  • Respiratory Medicine (548)
  • Rheumatology (224)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (190)
  • Sports Medicine (177)
  • Surgery (207)
  • Toxicology (38)
  • Transplantation (109)
  • Urology (80)