SynthesisEuropean journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine2024
Checks and balances: a meta-analysis on the known-groups validity of functional postural control tests in children.
Synthesis in European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine, 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.
- Postural Stability and Physical Fitness in Preschool Children: Associations with Lower-Limb Muscular Strength, Speed/Agility, and Cardiorespiratory Fitness.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Assessment of the Concurrent Validity and Reliability of the Persian Version of the Pediatric Balance Scale in Schoolchildren with Down Syndrome.International journal of school health · 2025Article
- Functional Mobility Studies in Younger Adults: Instrumented Timed Up and Go (iTUG) Test Using Inertial Devices.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Assessing postural control deficits with the Balance Evaluation Systems test for children, second edition in children with Developmental Coordination Disorder.Brazilian journal of physical therapyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPediatric physical therapists commonly treat children with postural control deficits. Ideally, pediatric functional postural control tests should therefore be able to identify postural control deficits in children with various disorders. Despite a plethora of available tests, evidence for their validity - especially known-groups - remains scarce. This review aims to determine the known-group validity of available functional postural control tests to differentiate various pediatric pathological groups of different ages from their typically developing (TD) peers. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus were systematically searched (last update: February 2023; PROSPERO: CRD42023408982). Forty case-control studies with a pathological pediatric sample (N.=1331) and TD peers (N.=1889) were included and selected for data-extraction and -analysis. Risk of bias was assessed using the SIGN checklist and level of evidence was scored using GRADE. Random-effect meta-analyses were performed to estimate pooled standardized mean differences (SMD) for the various test types and subclassified based on pathology and/or age. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: When compared with TD peers, children with underlying pathologies performed significantly worse on pediatric functional postural control test batteries (SMD=-2.21), the Timed Up and Go Test and variants (SMD=2.30), the One Leg Stance test and variants (SMD=-2.14), while the Reach tests showed a smaller difference (SMD=-1.19). Subclassification within the meta-analyses showed that pathology was an influencing factor for the test batteries and the one leg stance test and variants. Age was an influencing factor for the reach tests. None of the included functional postural control tests exceeded a low level of evidence.
conclusionsPediatric functional postural control tests that assess multiple aspects of postural control (such as test batteries) seem to offer higher known-groups validity than single-task tests (e.g. reach tests). The underlying pathology has a larger impact on the validity of these tests than age. There remains an overall low level of evidence for the known-groups validity of pediatric functional postural control tests indicating the need for research with more homogenous groups and norm reference data.
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.