ArticleCureus2024
Reliability of a Self-Administered Performance Evaluation Tool Based on the Modified Barthel Index.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Effect of the Otago Exercise Program on Activities of Daily Living in Older Adults With Sarcopenia].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2025Trial
- Rehabilitation of patients in the subacute phase of stroke using the ReHand robotic system: a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccurately assessing Activities of Daily Living (ADL) is crucial for evaluating patient independence, yet there is a lack of standardized tools suitable for large-scale surveys, particularly those that are self-administered. We aimed to validate the reliability of the self-administered Performance Evaluation Tool based on the modified Barthel Index (PET-MBI).
methodsIn this study, 53 patients and 18 occupational therapists were included to determine the inter-rater and intra-rater reliabilities via questionnaires. The inclusion criteria for patients were being admitted to a convalescent or community care ward and being able to communicate. The inclusion criteria for professionals were being an occupational therapist in charge of the patients and having at least two years of experience.
resultsThe inter-rater reliability scores of PET-MBI were 80.4 ± 20.4 and 81.1 ± 19.2 points for patient and therapist ratings, respectively. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for the total score was 0.888. Regarding intra-rater reliability, the patients' scores were 80.4 ± 20.4 and 84.1 ± 19.8 points for the first and second assessments, respectively. The ICC for the total score was 0.927.
conclusionThe self-administered PET-MBI demonstrated reliability in terms of total scores and numerous sub-items, demonstrating potential as a valuable tool for ADL assessment in large-scale surveys.
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.