Reproducibility of Performance-Based and Self-Reported Measures of Functional Status

Hoeymans, Nancy; Wouters, Elke; Feskens, E. J. M.; Bos, G.A.M. van den; Kromhout, Daan

doi:10.1093/gerona/52a.6.m363

Cited by 92 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The function component of the LLFDI demonstrated substantial associations with the TUG, and these correlations were strongest for lower-limb function (r = -0.49 to -0.52, p < 0.001). Hoeymans et al showed lower associations between gait speed (8 ft walk) and self-reported mobility (r = 0.17 to 0.32) and weaker associations between the speed of a 400 m walk and selfreported difficulty in walking and lifting tasks (r = -0.27 to -0.37) [8]. Suzuki et al did not find associations between maximum gait speed and PF-10 score (r = 0.28) [5].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Also, efforts to evaluate the effectiveness of clinical trials and community-based interventions designed to affect late-life function and disability have been hindered significantly by current instrumentation limitations. Several studies have shown poor to moderate associations between performance-based measures and self-reported functional status in older subjects [3][4][5][6][7][8]. Furthermore, Daltroy et al found that people may recalibrate their self-assessments based on recent health problems [9], which can raise questions about the validity of self-reported measures of physical function and disability in older persons.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Relationship between self-reported function and disability and balance performance measures in the elderly

Melzer

Kurz²,

Sarid³

et al. 2007

JRRD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-This study evaluated the reliability and validity of the Hebrew version of the Late-Life Function and Disability Instrument (LLFDI). Fifty-five older adults (mean age 79.7 +/-5.2) participated. We calculated test-retest reliability with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Partial correlations determined the construct validity with a balance measure (Berg Balance Scale [BBS]) and a mobility measure (Timed Up and Go [TUG] test). We examined known-group validity by comparing the scores of cane and noncane users. Test-retest ICCs ranged from good to excellent (0.77-0.90) for the function component and fair to good for the disability component (0.63-0.83), except for the disability management role subscale (0.46). BBS and TUG were associated with LLFDI overall function (r = 0.48, p < 0.001 and r = -0.52, p < 0.001, respectively). TUG and BBS were weakly associated with disability limitations (r = -0.26 and 0.32, respectively) and disability frequency (r = -0.16 and 0.24, respectively). Cane users showed significantly lower function scores than noncane users. We demonstrated that the Hebrew version of the LLFDI reliably and validly assesses older adults' function and disability. The LLFDI is recommended as an outcome instrument in studies in which older adults' function and disability are outcomes of interest.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship between self-reported function and disability and balance performance measures in the elderly

Melzer

Kurz²,

Sarid³

et al. 2007

JRRD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Reliability of the Minnesota LTPA Questionnaire may be hindered in elderly people because it requires recall of activities over the past 12 months, which may be particularly difficult in this group of individuals. The Zutphen Physical Activity Questionnaire (ZPAC) [75,76] showed good testretest reliability in a general elderly sample, although the reliability worsens in the oldest patients and in those with cognitive impairment [85].…”

Section: Reliabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantifying physical activity in daily life with questionnaires and motion sensors in COPD

Pitta¹,

Troosters²,

Probst³

et al. 2006

Eur Respir J

406

323

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accurate assessment of the amount and intensity of physical activity in daily life is considered very important due to the close relationship between physical activity level, health, disability and mortality. For this reason, assessment of physical activity in daily life has gained interest in recent years, especially in sedentary populations, such as patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).The present article aims to compare and discuss the two kinds of instruments more commonly used to quantify the amount of physical activity performed by COPD patients in daily life: subjective methods (questionnaires, diaries) and motion sensors (electronic or mechanical methods). Their characteristics are summarised and evidence of their validity, reliability and sensitivity is discussed, when available.Subjective methods have practical value mainly in providing the patients' view on their performance in activities of daily living and functional status. However, care must be taken when using subjective methods to accurately quantify the amount of daily physical activity performed. More accurate information is likely to be available with motion sensors rather than questionnaires. The selection of which motion sensor to use for quantification of physical activity in daily life should depend mainly on the purpose of its use.

show abstract

“…In the medical sciences, social sciences, and natural sciences the issue of reproducibility has already been discussed and analyzed in depth (Open Science Collaboration and others 2015; Deyo et al 1991;Downing 2004;Flyvbjerg 2001;Hoeymans et al 1997;McNutt 2014;Rothwell and Martyn 2000;Schmidt 2009). Even in information retrieval and machine learning, significant efforts have been made to standardize evaluations and ensure reproducibility (Eckart de Castilho and Gurevych 2011;Guyon and Elisseeff 2003;Hawking and Craswell 1999;Sonnenburg et al 2007;Voorhees 2005).…”

Section: Survey and Learn From Other Research Fieldsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards reproducibility in recommender-systems research

Beel

Breitinger

Langer

et al. 2016

User Model User-Adap Inter

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous recommendation approaches are in use today. However, comparing their effectiveness is a challenging task because evaluation results are rarely reproducible. In this article, we examine the challenge of reproducibility in recommender-system research. We conduct experiments using Plista's news recommender system, and Docear's research-paper recommender system. The experiments show that there are large discrepancies in the effectiveness of identical recommendation approaches in only slightly different scenarios, as well as large discrepancies for slightly different approaches in identical scenarios. For example, in one newsrecommendation scenario, the performance of a content-based filtering approach User-Adapted Interaction : umuai ; 26 (2016), 1. -S. 69-101 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007 was twice as high as the second-best approach, while in another scenario the same content-based filtering approach was the worst performing approach. We found several determinants that may contribute to the large discrepancies observed in recommendation effectiveness. Determinants we examined include user characteristics (gender and age), datasets, weighting schemes, the time at which recommendations were shown, and user-model size. Some of the determinants have interdependencies. For instance, the optimal size of an algorithms' user model depended on users' age. Since minor variations in approaches and scenarios can lead to significant changes in a recommendation approach's performance, ensuring reproducibility of experimental results is difficult. We discuss these findings and conclude that to ensure reproducibility, the recommender-system community needs to (1) survey other research fields and learn from them, (2) find a common understanding of reproducibility, (3) identify and understand the determinants that affect reproducibility, (4) conduct more comprehensive experiments, (5) modernize publication practices, (6) foster the development and use of recommendation frameworks, and (7) establish best-practice guidelines for recommender-systems research.

show abstract

Reproducibility of Performance-Based and Self-Reported Measures of Functional Status

Abstract: In the elderly male subjects, performance tests and self-reported disabilities had moderate to good reproducibility, with the exception of the test for standing balance. In very old or cognitively impaired populations, self-reported functional status may have a lower reproducibility.

Cited by 92 publications

References 23 publications

Relationship between self-reported function and disability and balance performance measures in the elderly

Relationship between self-reported function and disability and balance performance measures in the elderly

Quantifying physical activity in daily life with questionnaires and motion sensors in COPD

Towards reproducibility in recommender-systems research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About