ArticleClinical rehabilitation2024
Construct validity, responsiveness, and interpretability of the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation (USER) in patients admitted to inpatient geriatric rehabilitation.
Article in Clinical rehabilitation, 2024. 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.
- Home-based geriatric rehabilitation after shortened inpatient rehabilitation: cost-effectiveness analysis of the "Better@Home" multicentre prospective cohort study with a matched historical control group.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- Article
- Interprofessional collaboration during multidisciplinary team meetings in geriatric rehabilitation: an observational study.BMC geriatrics · 2025Observational
- IMPROVING THE PREDICTION OF FUNCTIONAL RECOVERY IN OLDER ADULTS WITH STROKE IN GERIATRIC REHABILITATION USING AN INERTIAL MEASUREMENT UNIT COMBINED WITH THE UTRECHT SCALE FOR EVALUATION OF REHABILITATION.Journal of rehabilitation medicine. Clinical communications · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation is a multi-domain measurement with good content validity, structural validity and reliability for measuring physical functioning (mobility, selfcare) and cognitive functioning in geriatric rehabilitation. We aimed to determine the construct validity of both Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation scales and the responsiveness and interpretability of the scale for physical functioning in geriatric rehabilitation.
designProspective follow-up study embedded in routine care.
settingFour care organisations in The Netherlands. SUBJECTS: Patients admitted for inpatient geriatric rehabilitation (2021-2022). MAIN MEASURES: Data collection included the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation, Mini-Mental State Examination, Barthel index, and a global rating scale anchor on recovery. Hypothesis testing was used to determine construct validity and responsiveness. For interpretability, minimal important change and floor and ceiling effects were determined.
resultsThe mean age of participants (
conclusionsThe Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation showed to be effective for evaluating physical functioning during geriatric rehabilitation as well as screening cognitive functioning. In total, 14.5 points difference has been established as a minimal important change for physical functioning.
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.