ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
Reliability Study of the Items of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) Using Kappa Analysis.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychometric properties of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale and culturally adapted or translated versions when used for infant populations internationally: A systematic review.Developmental medicine and child neurology · 2025Pooled it
- Inter-Rater Reliability of the Polish Version of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale in Children with Heart Disease.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- The standardization of the Polish version of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale.BMC pediatrics · 2023Article
- Enhancing motor screening efficiency: Toward an empirically derived abridged version of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale.Early human development · 2023Article
- Motor Development Comparison between Preterm and Full-Term Infants Using Alberta Infant Motor Scale.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- The Effect of a Parent-Directed Program to Improve Infants' Motor Skills.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Validation of a Natural Language Processing Algorithm for the Extraction of the Sleep Parameters from the Polysomnography Reports.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- The Alberta Infant Motor Scale: A tool for the assessment of motor aspects of neurodevelopment in infancy and early childhood.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe evaluated the interrater and intrarater reliabilities of the Korean version of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (K-AIMS).
methodsFor the interrater reliability test, six raters participated in the K-AIMS evaluation using video clips of 70 infants (aged between 0 and 18 months). One rater participated in an intrarater reliability test. Among 70 infants, 46 were born preterm and 24 were born full term. A total of 58 AIMS items were evaluated for supine, prone, sitting, and standing positions. A reliability analysis was conducted using ICC and Fleiss' kappa.
resultsThe highest Fleiss' kappa was found for the 4-7 months group for sitting (K = 0.701-1.000) and standing (K = 0.721-1.000), while the lowest K was the 3 months or under group for standing (K = 0.153-1.000). We found higher Fleiss' kappa statistics when all infants were evaluated without grouping for the three positions (K = 0.727-1.000), except standing (K = 0.192-1.000), for the interrater analysis.
conclusionOur results demonstrate the good reliability for the Korean version of the AIMS for Korean infants (preterm and full term).
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.