ReviewSpinal cord2024
Multidimensionality of leisure-time physical activity behaviour in adults with spinal cord injury: implications for measurement.
Review in Spinal cord, 2024. 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.
- Physical Activity Measurement in People with Spinal Cord Injury: A Comparative Review of Different Questionnaires.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Physical Activity Recall Assessment for People with SCI (PARA-SCI) has demonstrated the best test-retest reliability and validity of self-report measures of leisure-time physical activity (LTPA) for adults with SCI. However, the absence of internal consistency reliability data has been raised as a concern. Internal consistency is relevant only for unidimensional measures. In other populations, LTPA is known to be a multidimensional construct, evaluated with multidimensional measures. We tested for unidimensionality through secondary analysis of PARA-SCI data (n = 703). Cronbach's α was 0.227. Principal components analysis showed two components/dimensions ('Moderate and Heavy Intensity LTPA' and 'Mild Intensity LTPA') explained 73% of the variance. Binary logic crosstabulation produced no discernible patterns of behavioural interrelatedness across LTPA intensities. Together, these data demonstrate the multidimensionality of LTPA and the PARA-SCI is not unidimensional. Internal consistency should not be a criterion for evaluating LTPA questionnaires for use in studies of people with SCI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38151583What 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.