ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2017
Linking existing instruments to develop a continuum of care measure: accuracy comparison using function-related group classification.
Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of a Short Form Assessment Combining the Fugl-Meyer Assessment-Upper Extremity and the Wolf Motor Function Test for Evaluating Stroke Recovery.Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2023Article
- Functional Status Across Post-Acute Settings is Associated With 30-Day and 90-Day Hospital Readmissions.Journal of the American Medical Directors Association · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposesTo compare measurement accuracy of test forms with varied number of items (13, 8, and 4 items) generated from the self-care physical function item bank composed of Functional Independence Measure (FIM™) and the Minimum Data Set (MDS).
methodsRetrospective data analysis of 2499 Veterans who completed both FIM and MDS within 6 days. We compared measurement accuracy between the converted FIM (FIMc) motor score generated from the MDS and the original FIM (FIMa) motor score (13 items) at: (a) individual-level using point differences, and (b) group-level using function-related group (FRG).
resultsThe differences of mean FIMa and FIMc scores were between 0.05 and 1.07 points for all test forms. Over 81% of FIMc from MDS_13 were within 15 points of the FIMa. 81-90% of FRGs generated by the FIM short forms was identical to those generated by the FIMa for stroke, lower limb amputation, knee and hip replacement; and 59.9-90.5% by all MDS test forms. All MDS test forms had above 74% agreement with same or adjacent FMGs (ICC 0.65-0.91).
conclusionsThe accuracy is dependent on the comparison level (i.e., individual or group), length of the test and which FRG is used. Our results partially support using existing instruments-without decreasing the number of the items-to generate a continuum of care measurement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.