Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2002
Discriminative validity of the Dutch Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory.
СтатьяВалидационное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Custers Jan W, van der Net Janjaap, Hoijtink Herbert, Wassenberg-Severijnen Jeltje E, Vermeer Adri, Helders Paul J
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To examine the discriminative validity of the Dutch Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory (PEDI) to differentiate functional status between children with and without disabilities.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.
SETTING: A university children's hospital in the Netherlands.
PARTICIPANTS: A clinical sample comprising 197 children with disabilities (infantile encephalopathy, n=40; juvenile idiopathic arthritis, n=20; neurometabolic conditions, n=36; neuromuscular disorders, n=9; skeletal disorders, n=28; spina bifida, n=41; traumatic injury, n=23), and 62 children without disabilities.
INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Functional status was measured by using a Dutch version of the PEDI.
RESULTS: Discriminant analysis established the sensitivity and specificity of the PEDI. Correct predictions of group membership (disabled vs nondisabled) were found in both children without disabilities (93.5% correctly predicted) and children with disabling conditions (91.6% correctly predicted).
CONCLUSION: The discriminative validity of the Dutch PEDI between children with and without disabilities was excellent.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.
SETTING: A university children's hospital in the Netherlands.
PARTICIPANTS: A clinical sample comprising 197 children with disabilities (infantile encephalopathy, n=40; juvenile idiopathic arthritis, n=20; neurometabolic conditions, n=36; neuromuscular disorders, n=9; skeletal disorders, n=28; spina bifida, n=41; traumatic injury, n=23), and 62 children without disabilities.
INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Functional status was measured by using a Dutch version of the PEDI.
RESULTS: Discriminant analysis established the sensitivity and specificity of the PEDI. Correct predictions of group membership (disabled vs nondisabled) were found in both children without disabilities (93.5% correctly predicted) and children with disabling conditions (91.6% correctly predicted).
CONCLUSION: The discriminative validity of the Dutch PEDI between children with and without disabilities was excellent.