COMPASS
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Validation & Reliability of Oxford COMPetency ASSessment (COMPASS) for guiding mental capacity assessments.
IRAS ID
225313
Contact name
Nele Demeyere
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
University of Oxford
Duration of Study in the UK
4 years, 10 months, 31 days
Research summary
This study seeks to establish whether an objective cognitive profile from neuropsychological tasks included in the Oxford COMPetency ASSessment (COMPASS) tool can help determine mental capacity judgements (e.g. discharge destination and power of attorney) for patients whose mental capacity has been called into question.
The COMPASS is being developed as a computerised tablet-based, standardised assessment tool of mental capacity. It comprises of six neuropsychological tests which follow neuropsychological principles in order to specifically and objectively measure performance on the four aspects of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) (2005). The MCA (2005) states that in order to be attributed mental capacity, a patient needs to be able to: (i) understand the information given, (ii) retain the information, (iii) weigh up the information, and (iv) communicate the decision made.
Currently, non-standardised clinical interviews that follow the guidance outlined in the MCA (2005) conducted by health and social care professionals are considered to be the ‘gold standard’. The MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool was developed to provide a more standardised framework for the assessment of mental capacity (Appelbaum & Grisso, 2001). However, mental capacity assessment interviews tend to be inconsistent, and often have low inter-rater reliability and inadequate documentation (MacKenzie et al., 2008). For example, one study found a 56% level of agreement in clinicians who assessed capacity in patients with Alzheimer’s disease using a dichotomised classification system (Marson et al., 1997).
However, these are inconsistent, and often have inter-rater reliability as low as 56-72% (Marson et al., 1997; MacKenzie et al., 2008).Therefore, a measurement tool is needed to assess general decision-making ability in patients whose mental capacity has been called into question, which is highly reliable, time efficient and provides sufficient documentation for its applications and interpretation of the outcome scores (MacKenzie et al., 2008).
We would therefore like to conduct mental capacity interviews (based on a hypothetical decision, such as discharge destination) and COMPASS assessments with patients with a neurological history (e.g. stroke survivor), and COMPASS assessments with healthy controls. This will enable us to validate the COMPASS cognitive profile against a 'gold standard' clinical interview.
REC name
London - Harrow Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
17/LO/1401
Date of REC Opinion
8 Dec 2017
REC opinion
Further Information Unfavourable Opinion