ArticleFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2023
Finding functionality: Rasch analysis of the Functionality Appreciation Scale in community-dwelling adults in the US.
Article in Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Psychometric properties of the Lithuanian version of the functionality appreciation scale.Scientific reports · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: The Functionality Appreciation Scale (FAS) measures an individual's appreciation for the functions their body can perform, regardless of the individual's physical limitations. Prior studies reported on internal consistency, test-retest reliability, convergent validity, and exploratory or confirmatory factor analyses, but Rasch analysis has not yet been performed to evaluate the structural validity of the FAS. Methods: We recruited community-dwelling adults at the Minnesota State Fair and through contact lists of participants identifying interest in research done in the Brain Body Mind Lab (University of Minnesota). Community-dwelling adults with spinal cord injury (SCI) completed the FAS over Zoom. We analyzed the FAS using Rasch Measurement Theory, which produced the following outputs: item, and person fit, targeting, unidimensionality, person separation reliability (PSR), local item dependence (LID), principal component analysis of residuals (PCAR), and differential item functioning (DIF). Results: We recruited 567 participants (average age 52.15 ± 17.5 years, 63.84% women), among which 14 adults with SCI. After rescoring 3 items and deleting 1 item, the FAS had good person and item fit (except item 4). The PCAR and subsequent paired Discussion: The 6-item Rasch-based FAS demonstrated unidimensionality, good item fit (except item 4) and person fit, but the FAS will require more difficult items to be added to improve the targeting of the scale, and better reliability.
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.