ArticlePhysical therapy2024
Computerized Adaptive Testing for the Berg Balance Scale Improves Measurement Efficiency Without Compromising Precision in People With Stroke.
Article in Physical therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Short Forms and Computerized Adaptive Tests With Monosyllabic Words Can Efficiently Measure Speech Recognition.American journal of audiology · 2026Article
- Measurement Properties of the Functional Balance Ability Measure Across Subacute Neurologic Diagnoses.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2026Article
- A Community-Based Resistance Training Exercise for Post-Stroke Patients with Sarcopenia: Bridging Institutional and Community-Based Rehabilitation in a Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
objectiveThe objectives of this study were to confirm the Berg Balance Scale's (BBS) measurement properties and unidimensionality with an item response theory analysis in persons with subacute and chronic stroke and to examine the precision and efficiency of computerized adaptive testing (CAT).
methodsData were obtained from 519 ambulatory persons with subacute and chronic stroke in 2 retrospective databases. A principal component analysis (PCA) of residuals was used to evaluate unidimensionality. BBS fit to a rating scale model versus a partial credit model was examined, and item parameters were generated for CAT calibration. Person measures from all 14 items were defined as actual balance ability. BBS CAT simulations were used to examine changes in measurement precision with increasing number of items administered and a precision-based stopping rule (0.5 logit standard error [SE] threshold).
resultsA PCA of residuals supports the BBS unidimensionality and Rasch analysis supports using the rating scale model for measurement. Maximum precision for BBS CAT was SE = 0.40 logits when administering all items. BBS CAT estimated balance ability was highly correlated with actual ability when 4 or more items were administered (r > 0.9). Precision was within 0.5 logits when 5 or more items were administered (SE < 0.48 logits). BBS CAT estimated balance ability was highly correlated with actual ability (r = 0.952) using a precision-based stopping rule. The average number of items administered with the precision-based stopping rule was 5.43.
conclusionThe BBS is sufficiently unidimensional, and the rating scale model can be used for measurement. BBS CAT is efficient and replicates the full instrument's reliability when measuring balance ability in ambulatory persons with subacute and chronic stroke. Future work should aim to enhance the interpretability of measures to facilitate clinical decision-making. IMPACT: BBS CAT provides an efficient way of measuring balance ability for individuals in stroke rehabilitation giving clinicians more time with patients.
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.