Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24884466›Full record

Trial reportBMC geriatrics2014

Psychometric properties of four fear of falling rating scales in people with Parkinson's disease.

Stina B Jonasson, Maria H Nilsson, Jan Lexell

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC geriatrics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Effectiveness of a dance-physiotherapy combined intervention in Parkinson's disease: a randomized controlled pilot trial.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2021
    Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Clinical Usefulness of Retropulsion Tests in Persons with Mild to Moderate Parkinson's Disease.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Neurorehabilitation in dystonia: a holistic perspective.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2021
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Stina B JonassonDepartment of Health Sciences, Lund University, PO Box 157, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden. Stina.Jonasson@med.lu.se.
Maria H Nilsson
Jan Lexell

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFear of falling (FOF) is commonly experienced in people with Parkinson's disease (PD). It is a predictor of recurrent falls, a barrier to physical exercise, and negatively associated with health-related quality of life. A variety of rating scales exist that assess different aspects of FOF but comprehensive head-to-head comparisons of their psychometric properties in people with PD are lacking. The aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of four FOF rating scales in people with PD. More specifically, we investigated and compared the scales' data completeness, scaling assumptions, targeting, and reliability.

methodsThe FOF rating scales were: the Falls Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I), the Swedish FES (FES(S)), the Activities-specific Balance Confidence scale (ABC), and the modified Survey of Activities and Fear of Falling in the Elderly (mSAFFE). A postal survey was administered to 174 persons with PD. Responders received a second survey after two weeks.

resultsThe mean (SD) age and PD duration of the 102 responders were 73 (8) and 7 (6) years, respectively. ABC had worse data completeness than the other scales (6.9 vs. 0.9-1.3% missing data). All scales had corrected item-total correlations exceeding 0.4 and showed acceptable reliabilities (Cronbach's alpha and Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) >0.80) but only FES-I had ICC >0.90. The standard error of measurements ranged from 7% (FES-I) to 12% (FES(S)), and the smallest detectable differences ranged from 20% (FES-I) to 33% (FES(S)) of the total score ranges. ABC and FES(S) had substantially more outliers than mSAFFE and FES-I (10 and 15 vs. 3 and 4, respectively) when the two test occasions were compared.

conclusionsWhen assessing FOF in people with PD, the findings in the present study favoured the choice of FES-I or mSAFFE. However, FES-I was the only scale with ICC >0.90 which has been suggested as a minimum when using a scale for individual comparisons.

Indexed as

Accidental FallsAgedAged, 80 and overFearFemaleHealth SurveysHumansMaleParkinson DiseasePsychometricsQuality of LifeReproducibility of ResultsRisk FactorsSweden

Identifiers

PMID24884466
PMCPMC4035736

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.