ArticleTopics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation2022
Establishing Content Validity Evidence of the Pittsburgh Impairment Testing Tool (PITT) for Adults With Spina Bifida.
Article in Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Current scales to measure motor impairment in adults with spina bifida (SB) are limited by their complexity, variable interpretation (i.e., subjectively defined impairment levels), or inclusion of muscles groups that are not always practical to test in a clinical setting. Objectives: A novel motor impairment tool for adults with SB was evaluated for content validity. The tool uses findings from the manual muscle testing of hip flexion and knee extension to categorize individuals into four motor impairment groups. Methods: Expert feedback was obtained on the tool, and content validity was measured using Lawshe's content validity ratio (CVR) with critical values recommended by Ayre and Scally. Data from phase 1 and phase 2 were used to revise the survey and calculate the CVR of the tool, respectively (benchmark: CVR ≥ 0.636). Results: Of the 26 experts recruited, 17 received the survey and 15 participated in either phase 1 ( Conclusion: The high content validity, coupled with expert feedback, suggests the tool may give clinicians and researchers a practical method of classifying an individual's extent of motor impairment.
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.