Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2012
The Rivermead Mobility Index allows valid comparisons between subgroups of patients undergoing rehabilitation after stroke who differ with respect to age, sex, or side of lesion.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяВалидационное 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.
Roorda Leo D, Green John R, Houwink Annemieke, Bagley Pam J, Smith Jane, Molenaar Ivo W, Geurts Alexander C
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To investigate differential item functioning or item bias of the Rivermead Mobility Index (RMI) and its impact on the drawing of valid comparisons with the RMI between subgroups of patients after stroke who differ with respect to age, sex, or side of lesion.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.
SETTING: A rehabilitation center in the Netherlands and 2 stroke rehabilitation units and the wider community in the United Kingdom.
PARTICIPANTS: The RMI was completed for patients undergoing rehabilitation after stroke (N=620; mean age ± SD, 69.2±12.5y; 297 [48%] men; 269 [43%] right hemisphere lesion, and 304 [49%] left hemisphere lesion).
INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mokken scale analysis was used to investigate differential item functioning of the RMI between subgroups of patients who differed with respect to age (young vs older), sex (men vs women), and side of stroke lesion (right vs left hemisphere).
RESULTS: No differential item functioning was found for any of the comparison subgroups.
CONCLUSIONS: The RMI allows valid comparisons to be made between subgroups of patients undergoing rehabilitation after stroke who differ with respect to age, sex, or side of lesion.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.
SETTING: A rehabilitation center in the Netherlands and 2 stroke rehabilitation units and the wider community in the United Kingdom.
PARTICIPANTS: The RMI was completed for patients undergoing rehabilitation after stroke (N=620; mean age ± SD, 69.2±12.5y; 297 [48%] men; 269 [43%] right hemisphere lesion, and 304 [49%] left hemisphere lesion).
INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mokken scale analysis was used to investigate differential item functioning of the RMI between subgroups of patients who differed with respect to age (young vs older), sex (men vs women), and side of stroke lesion (right vs left hemisphere).
RESULTS: No differential item functioning was found for any of the comparison subgroups.
CONCLUSIONS: The RMI allows valid comparisons to be made between subgroups of patients undergoing rehabilitation after stroke who differ with respect to age, sex, or side of lesion.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Activities of Daily LivingAge FactorsAgedAged, 80 and overBrain MappingCross-Sectional StudiesDisability EvaluationFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMobility LimitationNetherlandsPhysical Therapy ModalitiesPrognosisPsychometricsRecovery of FunctionRehabilitation CentersReproducibility of ResultsRisk AssessmentSeverity of Illness IndexSex FactorsStrokeStroke RehabilitationTreatment OutcomeUnited Kingdom