Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 287

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Timed Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Tasks: Relationship to Cognitive Function and Everyday Performance Assessments in Older Adults

Owsley, Cynthia, Sloane, Michael, McGwin Jr., Gerald, Ball, Karlene·2002·Gerontology

Abstract

Background: We live in a world where information is presented in a time-limited fashion and successful adaptation is dependent on time-limited responses. Slowed visual-processing speed is common among older adults. Its impact on everyday task performance is not clearly understood. Objective: The goal was to determine whether visual-processing speed, as well as memory and inductive reasoning, are independently associated with the time required by older adults to complete instrumental activities of daily living typical of everyday life. Methods: Five timed instrumental activities of daily (TIADL) tasks were administered to 173 older adults (ages 65–90 years) along with assessments of visual-processing speed, memory, and inductive reasoning. The dependent variable was the time required to perform the task (e.g., finding a telephone number, making change, finding and reading the ingredients on a can of food, finding food items on a shelf, reading instructions on medicine container). Medical and functional comorbidities known to affect task performance were measured in order to adjust for their impact on the dependent variable. Other measures of everyday task competence (Everyday Problems Test, Observed Tasks of Daily Living, questionnaire on IADL difficulties) were also administered in order to determine to what extent existing measures of everyday performance are associated with TIADL performance. Test-retest reliability of the TIADL score was assessed in a separate sample. Results: Although memory and reasoning were crudely related to the time needed to perform the TIADL tasks, only processing speed was independently associated with TIADL scores. Those older adults with slow processing speed were more likely to require longer times to complete everyday tasks. Previously developed measures of everyday task competence (e.g., Everyday Problems Test, Observed Tasks of Daily Living) based on accuracy scoring did not strongly predict TIADL performance. Conclusion: These results suggest a unique role for an everyday competence test that focuses on the timely completion of everyday tasks, rather than on an assessment of accuracy alone. TIADL measures may prove useful in evaluating the everyday effectiveness of cognitive interventions targeted at increasing information-processing speed.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1159/000058360

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 287

Metadata

Authors
Owsley, C., Sloane, M., McGwin Jr., G., & Ball, K.
Venue
Gerontology
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2002
Volume
48
Issue
4
Pages
254-265
ISSN
  • 0304-324X (ISSN-L)
  • 1423-0003
OpenAlex
W1978903374
Cited by
287
References
3
FWCI
2.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Timed Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Tasks: Relationship to Cognitive Function and Everyday Performance Assessments in Older Adults. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1159/000058360
The paper
Owsley, C., Sloane, M., McGwin Jr., G., & Ball, K. (2002). Timed Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Tasks: Relationship to Cognitive Function and Everyday Performance Assessments in Older Adults. Gerontology. https://doi.org/10.1159/000058360

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.