Dataset Information

The WALLET Study: Examining Early Memory Loss and Personal Finance.

ABSTRACT:

Background and objectives

This feasibility study tests a new approach for assessing personal finance in older persons with early memory loss. The project examines 2 primary outcomes that gauge the financial viability and well-being of older adults: wealth loss and financial exploitation. The overall objective is to determine the association of financial literacy and management, financial decision-making, and cognition with wealth loss and financial exploitation.

Research design and methods

This cross-sectional study recruited 46 participants who were 60 years of age or older. Participants were classified as having mild cognitive impairment, perceived cognitive impairment, or no cognitive impairment. The study coordinator arranged with each participant to obtain copies of their main checking account statements for 12 consecutive months within the previous 2 years and, if appropriate, credit card statements. All statements were de-identified and assigned a random ID number. Participants then completed 2 telephone interviews.

Results

The average participant age was 72 years (standard deviation [SD] = 7.7); 84% were female, 39% White, and 35% currently married. Average education was 16.2 years (SD = 2.4); mean yearly household income was almost $42,000 (SD = 25,752); and monthly social security payments averaged $1,446 (SD = 1,244). Our results indicate that the methods used to analyze checking account statements, followed by telephone interviews to verify identified trends, were useful in developing a financial behavior index to measure wealth loss.

Discussion and implications

We demonstrate an alternative method for assessing personal finance using person-centered principles, which we believe are critical in the presence of diminished or impaired cognition. Our findings offer an innovative method for assessing the risk for wealth loss and financial exploitation.

SUBMITTER: Lichtenberg PA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9250658 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMany physicians complete medical school and graduate medical education (GME) burdened by high debt and financial illiteracy. This places them at increased risk for ill-informed financial decisions, which can result in increased stress and anxiety and a lower quality of life. Furthermore, financial concerns impact physicians' specialty selections and may partly explain the scarcity of primary care practitioners. In response, medical wellness programmes have increasingly sought to offer personal finance education, but there is little guidance on optimal curricula. Our objective is to systematically review the existing literature examining physician financial literacy curricula and to recommend a standardised personal finance curriculum.MethodsThis review used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 checklist to report the results of literature searches in PubMed, ERIC, MedEdPortal, EBSCO, JSTOR and Google Scholar. Three researchers used predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria to select articles, including a focus on financial concepts applicable in the USA. Selected articles published between 2000 and 2022 were assessed using the BEME strength of findings tool, and further assessed using modified Côté-Turgeon and Kirkpatrick model qualitative analyses tools.Findings49 articles met all inclusion criteria. Ten specifically described personal finance literacy curricula for medical students or GME trainees, with varied criteria for selecting instructors, topics and outcomes. All studies reported that audiences were ill prepared for making financial decisions but strongly desired financial literacy education. Qualitative analysis revealed Strength of Findings summary scores ranging from 2 to 4, while applicable Kirkpatrick Model scores were all 3 or greater. Based on these findings, a 14-module personal finance curriculum is proposed by the researchers, along with learning objectives.InterpretationAlthough medical students and GME trainees value financial literacy, few publications report the impact of actual curricula. These efforts vary in depth, breadth and measured impact. Future research should focus on development of valid testing instruments specifically for physicians, content standardisation, selection of credible instructors and delivery formats.

Project description:An increasing percentage of births are conceived with assisted reproductive technology (ART) and other infertility treatment. Despite findings that such treatments may be associated with diminished gestation and birth size, scarce data exist regarding infertility treatments and children's development in the United States.To assess the use and type of infertility treatment in relation to children's development through age 36 months.Prospective cohort study (conducted 2008-2014) that sampled based on infertility treatment and plurality. Included in the study were infants born between 2008 and 2010 in New York state (excluding New York City) whose parents completed developmental screening instruments through 36 months of age. A total of 4824 mothers (97% of 4989) completed 1 or more developmental screening instruments for 5841 children, including 1830 conceived with infertility treatment and 2074 twins.Maternal self-report of any infertility treatment was further categorized into ART and ovulation induction/intrauterine insemination. Assisted reproductive technology use was previously validated by linkage with the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology-Clinical Outcome Reporting System.Five developmental domains (fine motor, gross motor, communication, personal-social functioning, and problem-solving ability), as measured by the parental completion of the Ages and Stages Questionnaires at 4, 8, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36 months of age. Generalized linear mixed modeling techniques estimated adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% CIs for use and type of infertility treatment in relation to failing a developmental domain. Data were stratified by plurality and weighted for the sampling scheme.There were 1422 mothers (29.5%; mean [SD], age, 34.1 [5.2] years) who underwent infertility treatment. Infertility treatment was not associated with risk of their children failing any developmental domain (aOR, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.94-1.89). Assisted reproductive technology was associated with increased risk for failing any developmental domain but only when singletons and twins were evaluated together (aOR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.21-2.72). Adjustment for birth weight further attenuated this estimate (aOR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.82-1.93). After stratifying by plurality, type of treatment also was not significantly associated with failing any developmental domain for ovulation induction/intrauterine insemination (aOR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.57-1.77 for singletons and aOR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.76-2.21 for twins) or ART (aOR, 1.38; 95% CI, 0.78-2.43 for singletons and aOR, 1.58; 95% CI, 0.94-2.65 for twins).After considering plurality, children's development through age 3 years was similar irrespective of infertility treatment or specific type. To our knowledge, these findings are among the first to focus on non-ART treatments in the United States.