Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34711173›Full record

ArticleEuropean review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity2021

The Frail'BESTest: an adaptation of the "balance evaluation system test" for frail older adults; Concurrent validity, responsiveness, validity for fall prediction and detection of slower walkers.

A Kubicki, D Laroche, L Coquisart, G Basile, M Brika, F Mourey

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

A KubickiINSERM UMR1093-CAPS, Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté, UFR des Sciences du Sport, F-21000, Dijon, France.
D LarocheINSERM UMR1093-CAPS, Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté, UFR des Sciences du Sport, F-21000, Dijon, France. davy.laroche@chu-dijon.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1599-4258
L CoquisartCentre Hospitalier Durécu-Lavoisier, 116 Rue Louis Pasteur, 76160, Darnetal, France.
G BasileCentre Hospitalier Durécu-Lavoisier, 116 Rue Louis Pasteur, 76160, Darnetal, France.
M BrikaUFR Santé, Université de Bourgogne Franche-Comté, 4 place Tharradin, 25200, Montbéliard, France.
F MoureyINSERM UMR1093-CAPS, Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté, UFR des Sciences du Sport, F-21000, Dijon, France.
Inserm · FRUniversité de Bourgogne · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Frail'BESTest was developed in order to include frail older adults when they are using the BESTest. Recently, psychometrics properties (internal coherence, systems usefulness, complementarity and inter-rater reliability) of the Frail'BESTest were tested. To complete these analyses, this study will aim the assessment of its concurrent validity, responsiveness, predictive validity on falls occurrence, and slower walkers detection.

methodsThe correlation between the Frail'BESTest and the Gait Speed Test permitted to assess concurrent validity. The variation between the initial test score and the score obtained after the completion of a rehabilitation program was used to evaluate responsiveness with MANOVA analysis and standard response mean (SRM) calculation. Predictive validity was assessed with receiver-operating characteristic curves and area under the curve (AUC) analysis regarding falls occurrence. Slower walkers detection thresholds were computed by receiver-operating characteristic curves for the Frail'BESTest and the Tinetti test.

resultsThe concurrent validity of the test was good (r = 0.74; p < 0.001). The Standard Error of measurement was at 2.81 points and the Minimal Detectable Change at 7.79 points for the total score of the Frail'BESTest. The SRM was at 0.41 for the Tinetti test and 0.56 for the Frail'BESTest. The AUC, computed according to fall occurrence, was at 0.71 for the Gait Speed test, 0.673 for the Tinetti test and 0.693 for the Frail'BESTest. Both the Tinetti (AUC = 0.87) and the Frail'BESTest (AUC = 0.88) were found suitable for tracking slower walkers.

conclusionConcurrent validity and responsiveness of the Frail'BESTest were good. As for the Tinetti and the Frail'BESTest, they were unable to predict efficiently falls occurrence in the tested sample. The Frail'BESTest seems enough sensitive to spot the slower walkers efficiently, using a 15/20 threshold method. The Frail'BESTest was found to be a valid and responsive clinical test, therefore it can be recommended as an outcome measure in clinical practice.

Indexed as

BalanceFrail older adultsRehabilitationSystemic assessment

Identifiers

PMID34711173
PMCPMC8555199
OpenAlexW3208576993

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.