ArticleHeliyon2023
Investigating the validity and reliability of the GLFS-25 questionnaire by factor analysis in the elderly hospitalized at the intensive and cardiac care units.
Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Geriatric Locomotive Function Scale-25 (GLFS-25) is a 25-item tool most commonly used to diagnose locomotive syndrome in the elderly. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the validity and reliability of the GLFS-25 questionnaire using factor analysis. Materials and methods: This descriptive-analytical study was conducted on 186 elderly people. The GLFS-25 questionnaire contains 25 items, and each item is scored on a five-point Likert scale from 0 to 4. Data were analyzed by SPSS V.19 software. Descriptive (frequency, percentage, mean, and standard deviation) and inferential (Cronbach's alpha, correlation coefficient, Bartlett test, KMO index, scree plot, and factor analysis) statistics were used to present the findings. Results: Factor analysis revealed two hidden factors in the four dimensions of the questionnaire (i.e., pain, daily activities, social relations, and mental health). The first factor, named mobility and its consequential concerns), with a variance percentage of 74.323, had an effect on questions No. 19, 11, 25, 16, 6, 24, 5, 4, and 3. The second factor, named the problems and risks associated with daily and social activities, with a variance percentage of 78.680, had an effect on questions No. 17, 22, 7, 18, 14, 20, 13, 9, 12, 8, 10, 21, 2, 15, 1, and 23. Cronbach's alpha coefficient among the questionnaire's dimensions was 78.4%. Conclusion: The GLFS-25 questionnaire can be used as a valid and reliable tool to diagnose locomotive syndrome in the elderly.
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.