ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2014
Getting serious about test-retest reliability: a critique of retest research and some recommendations.
Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04406311 (Italian Validation of the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome Score), which is not on this map. Cited by 185 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Italian Validation of the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome Score
Who cites it
185 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of test-retest reliability and stability of delay and probability discounting.Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior · 2024Pooled it
- Person-centered care assessment tool with a focus on quality healthcare: a systematic review of psychometric properties.BMC psychology · 2024Pooled it
- Systematic review of instruments for assessing culinary skills in adults: What is the quality of their psychometric properties?PloS one · 2021Pooled it
- Reducing Adverse Drug Reactions for Older People in the Community: Evaluating the Validity and Reliability of the ADRe Profile.Journal of nursing management · 2025Trial
- Psychometric properties of EQ-5D-Y-3L versus EQ-5D-Y-5L Arabic versions in healthy and diseased children.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- Response to "Sample Representativeness and Test-Retest Reliability in the Japanese Everyday Ageism Scale: A Methodological Reconsideration".Geriatrics & gerontology international · 2026Article
- Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Preschool Eating, Lifestyle, and Sleeping Attitudes (PRELSA) scale.BMC pediatrics · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a motivation scale for health behavior change in patients with coronary heart disease: a cross-sectional study.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- Translation and psychometric evaluation of the Vietnamese version of the Clinical Reasoning Scale among nursing students.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Development and Psychometric Validation of the Japanese Version of the Everyday Ageism Scale (EAS-J) Among Older Adults.Geriatrics & gerontology international · 2026Article
- Reliability of force production based on the sense of effort at different force levels.Experimental brain research · 2026Article
- Psychometric Evaluation of the Brazilian Version of the Diabetic Foot Self-Care Questionnaire of the University of Malaga-Spain (DFSQ-UMA-Br).Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2026Article
- Developing a patient reported measure on out-of-pocket healthcare expenditure among Aboriginal patients: a formative study.Health promotion international · 2026Article
- Secrecy abilities and attitudes: development and psychometric validation of two secrecy scales.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- Validity and Reliability of the Stoma Self-Efficacy Scale in Patients With Intestinal Stoma: A Descriptive, Cross-Sectional and Validation Study.Journal of clinical nursing · 2026Article
- Article
- Internal Consistency of Self-report Anxiety Measures for Autistic Adults Without Intellectual Disabilities: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2026Article
- Application of the Minimal Clinically Important Difference to Adolescent Mental Health Interventions: A Case Study for Hopelessness.Child psychiatry and human development · 2026Article
- Psychometric Properties of the Chinese Version of the Psy-Flex Among Parents of Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2026Article
- Development and psychometric properties of the 'Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions (ABCC) tool' for people with chronic heart failure (CHF): a mixed methods approach.Family medicine and community health · 2026Article
125 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo focus attention on the need for rigorous and carefully designed test-retest reliability assessments for new patient-reported outcomes and to encourage retest researchers to be thoughtful, ambitious, and creative in their retest efforts.
methodsThe paper outlines key challenges that confront retest researchers, calls attention to some limitations in meeting those challenges, and describes some strategies to improve retest research.
resultsModest retest coefficients are often reported as acceptable, and many important decisions-such as the retest interval-appear not to be evidence-based. Retest assessments are seldom undertaken before a measure has been finalized, which rules out using retest data to select strong, reproducible items.
conclusionsStrategies for improving retest research include seeking input from patients or experts regarding the stability of the construct to support decisions about the retest interval, analyzing item-level retest data to identify items to revise or discard, establishing a priori standards of acceptability for reliability coefficients, using large, heterogeneous, and representative retest samples and collecting follow-up data to better understand consistent and inconsistent responses over time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24504622What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.