Observational studyPloS one2022
Criterion-related validity of Bedriddenness Rank with other established objective scales of ADLs, and Cognitive Function Score with those of cognitive impairment, both are easy-to-use official Japanese scales: A prospective observational study.
Observational study in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Identifying Key Balance Skills Predicting Functional Independence After Hip Fracture: A Decision Tree Analysis of Berg Balance Scale Sub-items.Geriatric orthopaedic surgery & rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Tooth loss mediates the association between smoking and an increased risk of dementia among older adults: The JAGES prospective cohort study.Journal of clinical periodontology · 2024Article
- Validation and Improvement of the Saga Fall Risk Model: A Multicenter Retrospective Observational Study.Clinical interventions in aging · 2024Observational
- Criterion-Related Validity of the Cognitive Function Score with the Revised Hasegawa's Dementia Scale and the Bedriddenness Rank with the Barthel Index and the Katz Index: A Multi-Center Retrospective Study.Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders extraArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimBedriddenness Rank (BR) and Cognitive Function Score (CFS), issued by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, Japan, are easy-to-use and widely used in the medical and long-term care insurance systems in Japan. This study aims to clarify the criterion-related validity of the CFS with the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and ABC Dementia Scale (ABC-DS), and to re-evaluate the criterion-related validity of BR with the Barthel Index (BI) or Katz Index (KI) in more appropriate settings and a larger population compared with the previous study.
methodsA single-center prospective observational study was conducted in an acute care hospital in a suburban city in Japan. All inpatients aged 20 years or older admitted from October 1, 2018 to September 30, 2019. The relationship between BR and the BI and KI, and the relationship between CFS and the MMSE and ABC-DS were analyzed using Spearman's correlation coefficients.
resultsWe enrolled 3,003 patients. Of these, 1,664 (56%) patients exhibited normal BR. The median (interquartile range) values of the BI and KI were 100 (65-100) and 6 (2-6), respectively. Spearman's rank correlation coefficients between BR and the BI and KI were -0.891 (p < 0.001) and -0.877 (p < 0.001), respectively. Of the patients, 1,967 (65.5%) showed normal CFS. The median (interquartile range) MMSE of 951 patients with abnormal CFS and ABC-DS of all patients were 15 (2-21) and 117 (102-117), respectively. Spearman's rank correlation coefficients between CFS and MMSE and ABC-DS were -0.546 (p < 0.001) and -0.862 (p < 0.001), respectively.
conclusionsBR and CFS showed significant criterion-related validity with well-established but complicated objective scales for assessing activities of daily living and cognitive functions, respectively. These two scales, which are easy to assess, are reliable and useful in busy clinical practice or large-scale screening settings.
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.