1 resultado para two-component system
em Bucknell University Digital Commons - Pensilvania - USA
Filtro por publicador
- KUPS-Datenbank - Universität zu Köln - Kölner UniversitätsPublikationsServer (1)
- Academic Archive On-line (Stockholm University; Sweden) (1)
- Academic Research Repository at Institute of Developing Economies (1)
- AMS Tesi di Dottorato - Alm@DL - Università di Bologna (14)
- AMS Tesi di Laurea - Alm@DL - Università di Bologna (6)
- Aquatic Commons (1)
- ArchiMeD - Elektronische Publikationen der Universität Mainz - Alemanha (30)
- Archimer: Archive de l'Institut francais de recherche pour l'exploitation de la mer (1)
- Archive of European Integration (4)
- Aston University Research Archive (24)
- Biblioteca de Teses e Dissertações da USP (2)
- Biblioteca Digital da Produção Intelectual da Universidade de São Paulo (23)
- Biblioteca Digital da Produção Intelectual da Universidade de São Paulo (BDPI/USP) (124)
- Biblioteca Virtual del Sistema Sanitario Público de Andalucía (BV-SSPA), Junta de Andalucía. Consejería de Salud y Bienestar Social, Spain (1)
- Bioline International (2)
- BORIS: Bern Open Repository and Information System - Berna - Suiça (30)
- Brock University, Canada (2)
- Bucknell University Digital Commons - Pensilvania - USA (1)
- Bulgarian Digital Mathematics Library at IMI-BAS (2)
- CaltechTHESIS (2)
- CentAUR: Central Archive University of Reading - UK (41)
- CiencIPCA - Instituto Politécnico do Cávado e do Ave, Portugal (1)
- Cochin University of Science & Technology (CUSAT), India (6)
- Coffee Science - Universidade Federal de Lavras (1)
- Comissão Econômica para a América Latina e o Caribe (CEPAL) (1)
- Consorci de Serveis Universitaris de Catalunya (CSUC), Spain (31)
- CORA - Cork Open Research Archive - University College Cork - Ireland (3)
- Corvinus Research Archive - The institutional repository for the Corvinus University of Budapest (1)
- Dalarna University College Electronic Archive (3)
- Digital Commons - Michigan Tech (6)
- Digital Commons at Florida International University (8)
- Digital Peer Publishing (1)
- Digital Repository at Iowa State University (4)
- DigitalCommons@The Texas Medical Center (21)
- Doria (National Library of Finland DSpace Services) - National Library of Finland, Finland (20)
- Earth Simulator Research Results Repository (1)
- FUNDAJ - Fundação Joaquim Nabuco (1)
- Glasgow Theses Service (1)
- Illinois Digital Environment for Access to Learning and Scholarship Repository (1)
- Institutional Repository of Leibniz University Hannover (1)
- INSTITUTO DE PESQUISAS ENERGÉTICAS E NUCLEARES (IPEN) - Repositório Digital da Produção Técnico Científica - BibliotecaTerezine Arantes Ferra (1)
- Instituto Gulbenkian de Ciência (1)
- Instituto Politécnico de Leiria (1)
- Instituto Politécnico de Viseu (1)
- Instituto Politécnico do Porto, Portugal (8)
- Iowa Publications Online (IPO) - State Library, State of Iowa (Iowa), United States (4)
- Lume - Repositório Digital da Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (1)
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1)
- National Center for Biotechnology Information - NCBI (94)
- Nottingham eTheses (1)
- Portal de Revistas Científicas Complutenses - Espanha (2)
- Portal do Conhecimento - Ministerio do Ensino Superior Ciencia e Inovacao, Cape Verde (1)
- Publishing Network for Geoscientific & Environmental Data (24)
- QUB Research Portal - Research Directory and Institutional Repository for Queen's University Belfast (9)
- RDBU - Repositório Digital da Biblioteca da Unisinos (1)
- Repositório Alice (Acesso Livre à Informação Científica da Embrapa / Repository Open Access to Scientific Information from Embrapa) (1)
- Repositório Científico do Instituto Politécnico de Lisboa - Portugal (6)
- Repositório da Produção Científica e Intelectual da Unicamp (20)
- Repositório digital da Fundação Getúlio Vargas - FGV (1)
- REPOSITORIO DIGITAL IMARPE - INSTITUTO DEL MAR DEL PERÚ, Peru (1)
- Repositório Institucional da Universidade de Aveiro - Portugal (2)
- Repositório Institucional UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista "Julio de Mesquita Filho" (102)
- RUN (Repositório da Universidade Nova de Lisboa) - FCT (Faculdade de Cienecias e Technologia), Universidade Nova de Lisboa (UNL), Portugal (8)
- Scielo Saúde Pública - SP (17)
- Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE) (SIRE), United Kingdom (3)
- Universidad de Alicante (3)
- Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (8)
- Universidade Complutense de Madrid (4)
- Universidade do Minho (8)
- Universidade Federal do Pará (1)
- Universita di Parma (1)
- Universitat de Girona, Spain (2)
- Universitätsbibliothek Kassel, Universität Kassel, Germany (8)
- Université de Lausanne, Switzerland (74)
- Université de Montréal, Canada (6)
- Université Laval Mémoires et thèses électroniques (1)
- University of Connecticut - USA (2)
- University of Michigan (35)
- University of Queensland eSpace - Australia (79)
Resumo:
The short, portable mental status questionnaire (SPMSQ) developed by Pfeiffer has several advantages over previous short instruments designed to assess the intellectual functioning of older adults. It is based upon data from both institutionalized and community-dwelling elderly. Although Pfeiffer a four-group classification, he used to groups in his initial validation study: (a) intact/mildly impaired, and (b) moderately/severely impaired. The present study compared clinicians' ratings with those based upon the SPMSQ scores, and examined the validity of the four-group classification. The sample included 181 subjects from seven intermediate care facilities and nine home-care agencies. All were assessed by the OARS questionnaire, which includes the SPMSQ Three discriminant analyses were performed with three different criteria, for two-group, three-group, and four-group models. Results indicated that the two-group model (intact/mildly impaired and moderately/severely impaired) permitted significant discrimination. The four-group model, however, gave less distinct results. In particular, patients who were mildly intellectually impaired could not be clearly distinguished from those who were intact and from those who were moderately impaired. The three-group model (minimally, moderately, severely impaired) seemed to offer the best compromise between the gross dichotomy of the original two-model system and the less accurate four category system.