Applying generalizability theory to examine assessments of subjective cognitive complaints: whose reports should we rely on - participant versus informant?

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to apply the generalizability theory (G-theory) to investigate dynamic and enduring patterns of subjective cognitive complaints (SCC), and reliability of two widely used SCC assessment tools. DESIGN: G-theory was applied to assessment scales using longitudinal measurement design with five assessments spanning 10 years of follow-up. SETTING: Community-dwelling older adults aged 70-90 years and their informants, living in Sydney, Australia, participated in the longitudinal Sydney Memory and Ageing Study. PARTICIPANTS: The sample included 232 participants aged 70 years and older, and 232 associated informants. Participants were predominantly White Europeans (97.8%). The sample of informants included 76 males (32.8%), 153 females (65.9%), and their age ranged from 27 to 86 years, with a mean age of 61.3 years (SD = 14.38). MEASUREMENTS: The Memory Complaint Questionnaire (MAC-Q) and the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE). RESULTS: The IQCODE demonstrated strong reliability in measuring enduring patterns of SCC with G = 0.86. Marginally acceptable reliability of the 6-item MAC-Q (G = 0.77-0.80) was optimized by removing one item resulting in G = 0.80-0.81. Most items of both assessments were measuring enduring SCC with exception of one dynamic MAC-Q item. The IQCODE significantly predicted global cognition scores and risk of dementia incident across all occasions, while MAC-Q scores were only significant predictors on some occasions. CONCLUSIONS: While both informants' (IQCODE) and self-reported (MAC-Q) SCC scores were generalizable across sample population and occasions, self-reported (MAC-Q) scores may be less accurate in predicting cognitive ability and diagnosis of each individual.

Infant carrying: the role of increased locomotory costs in early tool development.

Among the costs of reproduction, carrying one's infant incurs one of the greatest drains on maternal energy, simply because of the added mass alone. Because of the dearth of archaeological evidence, however, how early bipeds dealt with the additional cost of having to carry infants who were less able to support their body weight against gravity is not particularly well understood. This article presents evidence on the caloric drain of carrying an infant in one's arms versus having a tool with which to sling the infant and carry her passively. The burden of carrying an infant in one's arms is on average 16% greater than having a tool to support the baby's mass and seems to have the potential to be a greater energetic burden even than lactation. In addition, carrying a baby in one's arms shortens and quickens the stride. An anthropometric trait that seems to offset some of the increased cost of carrying a baby in the arms is a wider bi-trochanteric width.