Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26859678›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2016

Functional Assessments Used by Occupational Therapists with Older Adults at Risk of Activity and Participation Limitations: A Systematic Review.

Kylie Wales, Lindy Clemson, Natasha Lannin, Ian Cameron

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Self-reported quality of life following stroke: a systematic review of instruments with a focus on their psychometric properties.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Reliability and validity of on-road driving tests in vulnerable adults: a systematic review.International journal of rehabilitation research. Internationale Zeitschrift fur Rehabilitationsforschung. Revue internationale de recherches de readaptation · 2019
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Discordance Between Self-Report and Performance-Based Measures Among At-Risk Older Adults: A Secondary Data Analysis.The American journal of occupational therapy : official publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Energy conservation, minimum steps, and adaptations when needed: A scoping review.Hong Kong journal of occupational therapy : HKJOT · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Kylie WalesAgeing Work and Health Research Unit and Centre of Excellence in Population Ageing Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Sydney, Lidcombe, NSW, Australia.
Lindy ClemsonAgeing Work and Health Research Unit and Centre of Excellence in Population Ageing Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Sydney, Lidcombe, NSW, Australia.
Natasha LanninSchool of Allied Health, La Trobe University and Occupational Therapy Department, Alfred Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Ian CameronJohn Walsh Centre for Rehabilitation Research, Sydney Medical School Northern, University of Sydney, St Leonards, NSW, Australia.
University of Sydney · AUAlfred Health · AUNorthern Sydney Local Health District · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe use of functional assessments to evaluate patient change is complicated by a lack of consensus as to which assessment is most suitable for use with older adults.

objectiveTo identify and appraise the properties of assessments used to evaluate functional abilities in older adults.

methodsA systematic review of randomised controlled trials of occupational therapy interventions was conducted up to 2012 to identify assessments used to measure function. Two authors screened and extracted data independently. A second search then identified papers investigating measurement properties of each assessment. Studies from the second search were included if: i) published in English, ii) the assessment was not modified from its original published form, iii) study aim was to evaluate the quality of the tool, iv) and was original research. Translated versions of assessments were excluded. Measurement quality was rated using the COSMIN checklist and Terwee criteria.

resultsTwenty-eight assessments were identified from the systematic search of occupational therapy interventions provided to older adults. Assessments were of varied measurement quality and many had been adapted (although still evaluated as though the original tool had been administered) potentially altering the conclusions drawn about measurement quality. Synthesis of best evidence established 15 functional assessments have not been tested in an older adult population.

conclusionsThe Functional Autonomy Measurement System (SMAF) appears to be a promising assessment for use with older adults. Only two tools (the SMAF and the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills (AMPS)) were deemed to be responsive to change when applied to older adults. Health professionals should use functional assessments that have been validated with their population and in their setting. There are reliable and valid assessments to capture the functional performance of older adults in community and hospital settings, although further refinement of these assessments may be necessary.

Indexed as

Activities of Daily LivingAgedHumansOccupational TherapyRecovery of FunctionRiskTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID26859678
PMCPMC4747506
OpenAlexW2258084644

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.