A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Psychometric properties of Brief-Balance Evaluation Systems Test (Brief-BESTest) in evaluating balance performance in individuals with chronic stroke. | LitMetric

Objective: To examine the psychometric properties of the Brief-Balance Evaluation Systems Test (Brief-BESTest) in individuals with chronic stroke.

Materials And Methods: This was an observational study with repeated measurements involving 50 participants with chronic stroke [mean (SD) age: 59.2 (7.3) years]. Each participant with stroke was evaluated with the Brief-BESTest, Berg balance scale (BBS), Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke Patients (PASS), Fugl-Meyer Motor Assessment (FMA), Chedoke-McMaster Stroke Assessment (CMSA), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS). Two raters (rater 1 and 2) provided the Brief-BESTest scores of the first 27 participants independently to establish inter-rater reliability. After 15 min of rest, the same 27 participants were evaluated with the Brief-BESTest again by rater 1 to establish intra-rater reliability. The Brief-BESTest scores of the stroke group were also compared with those of the control group [= 27, mean (SD) age: 56.7 (7.7) years].

Results: The Brief-BESTest had no substantial floor and ceiling effects, good intra-rater (ICC  = 0.974) and inter-rater (ICC  = 0.980) reliability and internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.818). The minimal detectable change at 95% confidence level was 2 points. The Brief-BESTest showed moderate to very strong correlations with other balance (BBS and PASS) and motor impairment (FMA, CMSA) measures ( = .547-.911, < .001), thus revealing good concurrent and convergent validity. Its correlation with measures that evaluated other constructs was weaker (MoCA:  = .437, = .002) or non-significant (GDS:  = -0.152, = .292), thus showing good discriminant validity. Good known-groups validity was established, as the Brief-BESTest was effective in distinguishing participants with stroke from controls (cutoff score: <18, area under curve: 0.942), and individuals with stroke who required assistive device for their outdoor mobility from those who did not (cutoff score <14, area under curve: 0.810).

Conclusions: The Brief-BESTest has good reliability and validity in assessing balance function in individuals with chronic stroke.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5346529PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/brb3.649DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

psychometric properties
8
properties brief-balance
8
brief-balance evaluation
8
evaluation systems
8
systems test
8
brief-bestest
8
test brief-bestest
8
individuals chronic
8
chronic stroke
8
evaluated brief-bestest
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!