ArticleF1000Research2023
Translation, reliability, and validation of the Dutch Safe Use of Mobility Aid Checklist (SUMAC-NL) for walker use in people living with dementia.
Article in F1000Research, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: People with dementia have a yearly risk of falling of 60 to 80 percent. Therefore, a walker is often recommended. However, the use of a walker in people with dementia is associated with a threefold increased odds of falls compared to their healthy peers who walk with a walker. Assessing walking skills with a walker can improve the quality of advice on its use. Therefore, a tool to assess functional walking skills with a walker is needed. The SUMAC was developed to fill this gap. So far, there is no Dutch instrument available that can assess functional walking skills with a walker in people with dementia. Methods: Reliability was evaluated by scoring videos of people with dementia (n = 9) using a walker performing the SUMAC-NL. ICC was used to assess inter-rater and test-retest reliability. An expert panel (n = 8) evaluated the content validity using the content validity index (CVI) and the content validity ratio (CVR). Results: Inter-rater reliability of the SUMAC-NL was statistically significant for the physical function (PF) domain (ICC = 0.94, 95%CI (0.84, 0.98, p < 0.001) and for the interaction with equipment (EQ) domain (ICC = 0.79, 95%CI (0.49 - 0.95), p < 0.001). Test-retest reliability was statistically significant for both the PF domain (ICC = 0.95, 95%CI (0.89, 0.99), p < 0.001) and EQ domain (ICC = 0.92, 95%CI (0.82, 0.98), p < 0.001). The SUMAC-NL shows content validity with a CVI >0.79 for both domains and a CVR of 0.53 on the PF domain and 0.78 on the EQ domain. Conclusions: The SUMAC-NL shows good to excellent reliability and content validity for both the PF and the EQ domain. The SUMAC-NL seems to be a promising tool to assess walking with a walker in people with dementia in the Netherlands.
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.