ArticleNeurorehabilitation and neural repair
Development of a Remote Version of the Graded Redefined Assessment of Strength, Sensation, and Prehension (GRASSP): Validity and Reliability.
Article in Neurorehabilitation and neural repair. 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, 2 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
15 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Graded Redefined Assessment of Strength, Sensation, and Prehension (GRASSP V1.0) was developed in 2010 as a 3-domain assessment for upper extremity function after tetraplegia (domains: Strength, Sensibility, and Prehension). A remote version (rGRASSP) was created in response to the growing needs of the field of Telemedicine.
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to assess the psychometric properties of rGRASSP, establishing concurrent validity and inter-rater reliability.
methodsIndividuals with tetraplegia (n = 61) completed 2 visits: 1 in-person and 1 remote. The first visit was completed in-person to administer the GRASSP, and the second visit was conducted remotely to administer the rGRASSP. The rGRASSP was scored both by the administrator of the rGRASSP (Examiner 1), and a second assessor (Examiner 2) to establish inter-rater reliability. Agreement between the in-person and remote GRASSP evaluations was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman agreement plots.
resultsThe remote GRASSP demonstrated excellent concurrent validity with the GRASSP (left hand intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = .96, right ICC = .96). Concurrent validity for the domains was excellent for strength (left ICC = .96, right ICC = .95), prehension ability (left ICC = .94, right ICC = .95), and prehension performance (left ICC = .92, right ICC = .93), and moderate for sensibility (left ICC = .59, right ICC = .68). Inter-rater reliability for rGRASSP total score was high (ICC = .99), and remained high for all 4 domains. Bland-Altman plots and limits of agreements support these findings.
conclusionsThe rGRASSP shows strong concurrent validity and inter-rater reliability, providing a psychometrically sound remote assessment for the upper extremity in individuals with tetraplegia.
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.