Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34906195›Full record

ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2021

Disablement in the Physically Active Scale Short Form-8: psychometric evaluation.

Madeline P Casanova, Megan C Nelson, Michael A Pickering, Lindsay W Larkins, Karen M Appleby, Emma J Grindley, Russell T Baker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors.

Madeline P CasanovaUniversity of Idaho, 875 Perimeter Drive, Moscow, ID, 83844, USA.
Megan C NelsonUniversity of Idaho, 875 Perimeter Drive, Moscow, ID, 83844, USA.
Michael A PickeringUniversity of Idaho, 875 Perimeter Drive, Moscow, ID, 83844, USA.
Lindsay W LarkinsUniversity of Idaho, 875 Perimeter Drive, Moscow, ID, 83844, USA.
Karen M ApplebyIdaho State University, 921 South 8th Ave, Pocatello, ID, 83209, USA.
Emma J GrindleyUniversity of Idaho, 875 Perimeter Drive, Moscow, ID, 83844, USA.
Russell T BakerUniversity of Idaho, 875 Perimeter Drive, Moscow, ID, 83844, USA. russellb@uidaho.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3352-9632

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient-centered care and evidence-based practice (EBP) are core competencies for health care professionals. The importance of EBP has led to an increase in research involving clinical outcomes; current recommendations emphasize collecting patient focused measures, thus increasing the need for psychometrically sound patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) of health. Disablement has been identified as a valuable multi-dimensional construct for patient care. The Disablement in the Physically Active Scale Short Form-8 (DPA SF-8) has been proposed as a tool to be used in the physically active population that assesses a physical summary component of health and a quality of life component however, further analysis is necessary to ensure the instrument is psychometrically sound.

methodsConfirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) were conducted on the DPA SF-8 at each time point to ensure factor structure. Reliability of the scale and internal consistency of the subscales were assessed, and a minimal detectable change (MDC) calculated. Additionally, a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was also established, and invariance testing across three time points and groups was conducted.

resultsThe CFAs at all three visits exceeded recommended model fit indices. The interclass correlation coefficient value (.924) calculated indicated excellent scale reliability and Cronbach's alpha for subscales PHY and QOL were within recommend values. The MDC value calculated was 5.83 and the MCID for persistent injuries were 2 points and for acute injuries, 3 points. The DPA SF-8 was invariant across time and across subgroups.

conclusionsThe DPA SF-8 met CFA recommendations and criteria for multi-group and longitudinal invariance testing, which indicates the scale may be used to assess for differences between the groups or across time. Our overall analysis indicates the DPA SF-8 is a valid, reliable, and responsive instrument to assess patient improvement in the physically active population.

Indexed as

Confirmatory factor analysisDisablementPatient reported outcome measuresQuality of life

Identifiers

PMID34906195
PMCPMC8669416

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.