Measurement properties of Brief-BESTest scores from children, adolescents, and youth with visual impairments.

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION Disability and Rehabilitation Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2023-12-01 DOI:10.1080/09638288.2023.2288935
Adam Pennell, Jenna Fisher, Matthew Patey, Sally Taunton Miedema, David Stodden, Lauren Lieberman, Collin Webster, Ali Brian
{"title":"Measurement properties of Brief-BESTest scores from children, adolescents, and youth with visual impairments.","authors":"Adam Pennell, Jenna Fisher, Matthew Patey, Sally Taunton Miedema, David Stodden, Lauren Lieberman, Collin Webster, Ali Brian","doi":"10.1080/09638288.2023.2288935","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> This study aimed to vet the measurement properties of Brief-BESTest scores in children, adolescents, and youth with visual impairment and blindness (YVI). <b>Methods:</b> A cross-sectional sample of YVI (<i>N</i> = 101) completed the Brief-BESTest, a modified version of the Y-Balance Test, the 360-degree turn test, bipedal quiet stance, and Activity-Specific Balance Confidence Scales. Thirty-seven YVI completed test-retest of the Brief-BESTest using a one-year interval. Using classical test theory, various forms of total and item-level Brief-BESTest score reliability and validity were investigated in YVI. <b>Results:</b> All inter-rater reliability coefficients were ≥ .80. When considering the eight items of the Brief-BESTest, 27 of the 28 possible correlations were statistically significant (<i>p</i><.05). Various internal consistency and item difficulty results were strong. When taking total Brief-BESTest scores and their association with the complementary balance tasks/metrics into account, 11 of 13 associations were statistically significant (<i>p</i><.05) providing strong convergent validity evidence. Being multimorbid and degree of vision significantly predicted total Brief-BESTest scores (<i>p</i><.001) suggesting construct (i.e. known groups) validity. Numerous test-retest results (e.g. coefficients, limits of agreement) following the one-year interval were indicative of score stability. <b>Conclusion:</b> Practitioners and researchers should have confidence in, and consider adopting, the Brief-BESTest to examine multidimensional balance in YVI.</p>","PeriodicalId":50575,"journal":{"name":"Disability and Rehabilitation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Disability and Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2023.2288935","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to vet the measurement properties of Brief-BESTest scores in children, adolescents, and youth with visual impairment and blindness (YVI). Methods: A cross-sectional sample of YVI (N = 101) completed the Brief-BESTest, a modified version of the Y-Balance Test, the 360-degree turn test, bipedal quiet stance, and Activity-Specific Balance Confidence Scales. Thirty-seven YVI completed test-retest of the Brief-BESTest using a one-year interval. Using classical test theory, various forms of total and item-level Brief-BESTest score reliability and validity were investigated in YVI. Results: All inter-rater reliability coefficients were ≥ .80. When considering the eight items of the Brief-BESTest, 27 of the 28 possible correlations were statistically significant (p<.05). Various internal consistency and item difficulty results were strong. When taking total Brief-BESTest scores and their association with the complementary balance tasks/metrics into account, 11 of 13 associations were statistically significant (p<.05) providing strong convergent validity evidence. Being multimorbid and degree of vision significantly predicted total Brief-BESTest scores (p<.001) suggesting construct (i.e. known groups) validity. Numerous test-retest results (e.g. coefficients, limits of agreement) following the one-year interval were indicative of score stability. Conclusion: Practitioners and researchers should have confidence in, and consider adopting, the Brief-BESTest to examine multidimensional balance in YVI.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
儿童、青少年和青少年视力障碍的brief - best分数的测量特性。
目的:探讨brief - best评分在儿童、青少年和青少年视力障碍和失明(YVI)中的测量特性。方法:YVI的横断面样本(N = 101)完成了brief - best测试,Y-Balance测试的修改版本,360度转弯测试,两足安静站立和特定活动平衡信心量表。37个YVI以一年的间隔完成了brief - best的重新测试。运用经典测试理论,研究了YVI中各种形式的总体和项目级brief - best得分的信度和效度。结果:所有量表间信度系数均≥0.80。在考虑brief - best的8个项目时,28个可能的相关性中有27个具有统计显著性(ppp结论:从业者和研究人员应该对brief - best有信心,并考虑采用brief - best来检查YVI的多维平衡。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Disability and Rehabilitation
Disability and Rehabilitation 医学-康复医学
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
9.10%
发文量
415
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Disability and Rehabilitation along with Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology are international multidisciplinary journals which seek to encourage a better understanding of all aspects of disability and to promote rehabilitation science, practice and policy aspects of the rehabilitation process.
期刊最新文献
A scoping review of observation-based tools for assessing use of the upper limb in activities. The healthcare experience of young stroke survivors: an interpretative phenomenological study. Clinician perspectives of engaging parents in behavioural interventions: a thematic analysis in Aotearoa New Zealand. Effects of inspiratory muscle training on pulmonary function, diaphragmatic thickness, balance and exercise capacity in people after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Effectiveness of intensive motor learning approaches from working on a vertical surface on hemiplegic children's upper limb motor skills, a randomized controlled trial.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1