ArticlePloS one2019
A novel assessment for Readiness Evaluation during Simulated Dismounted Operations: A reliability study.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04494555 (Do Adaptable Sockets Improve Military Performance?), which is not on this 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.
Do Adaptable Sockets Improve Military Performance?
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of a multidimensional military readiness assessment.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2024Article
- Testing an adjustable prosthetic socket in a simulated military environment.Journal of rehabilitation and assistive technologies engineeringArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the intersession reliability of the Readiness Evaluation during Simulated Dismounted Operations (REDOp), a novel ecologically-based assessment for injured Service Members, provide minimal detectable change values, and normative reference range values. To evaluate the ability to differentiate performance limitations between able-bodied and injured individuals using the REDOp.
designRepeated measures design and between group comparison.
settingOutpatient rehabilitative care setting.
participantsService Members who were able-bodied (n = 32) or sustained a traumatic lower extremity injury (n = 22).
interventionsDuring the REDOp, individuals walked over variable terrain as speed and incline progressively increased; they engaged targets; and carried military gear.
main outcome measuresEndurance measured using total distance traveled; walking stability measured using range of full-body angular momentum; and shooting accuracy, precision, reaction time and acquisition time.
resultsIntersession reliability analyses were conducted on a sub-group of 18 able-bodied Service Members. Interclass correlation coefficient values were calculated for distance traveled (0.91), range of angular momentum about three axes (0.78-0.93), shooting accuracy (0.61), precision (0.47), reaction time (0.21), and acquisition time (0.77). Service Members with lower extremity injury demonstrated significantly less distance traveled with a median distance of 0.89 km compared to 2.73 km for the able-bodied group (p < 0.001). Service Members with lower extremity injury demonstrated significantly less stability in the frontal and sagittal planes than the able-bodied group (p < 0.001). The primary performance limiter was endurance followed by pain for both groups. There was no evidence of ceiling effects.
conclusionsThe REDOp is a highly reliable, military-relevant assessment that can be used to measure performance and identify deficits across the domains of activity tolerance, gait stability, and shooting performance.
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.