Skip to main content
  • Other Publications
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
Advertisement
JCORE Reference
this is the JCORE Reference site slogan
  • Home
  • Most Read
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Advertising
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Folders
    • Help
  • Patients
  • Reference Site Links
    • View Regions
  • Archive

Does the Brief-BESTest Meet Classical Test Theory and Rasch Analysis Requirements for Balance Assessment in People With Neurological Disorders?

Elisabetta Bravini, Antonio Nardone, Marco Godi, Simone Guglielmetti, Franco Franchignoni, Andrea Giordano
DOI: 10.2522/ptj.20150550 Published 1 October 2016
Elisabetta Bravini
E. Bravini, PT, PhD, Department of Translational Medicine, University of Eastern Piedmont, Novara, Italy, and Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Salvatore Maugeri Foundation, Scientific Institute of Veruno, Novara, Italy.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Antonio Nardone
A. Nardone, MD, PhD, Department of Translational Medicine, University of Eastern Piedmont, and Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Salvatore Maugeri Foundation, Scientific Institute of Veruno.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Marco Godi
M. Godi, PT, MS, Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Salvatore Maugeri Foundation, Scientific Institute of Veruno, Via Revislate 13, 28010 Veruno, Italy.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Simone Guglielmetti
S. Guglielmetti, PT, Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Salvatore Maugeri Foundation, Scientific Institute of Veruno.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Franco Franchignoni
F. Franchignoni, MD, Specialty School in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Andrea Giordano
A. Giordano, PhD, Unit of Bioengineering, Salvatore Maugeri Foundation, Scientific Institute of Veruno.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Figures

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

Person ability and item difficulty map of the Brief-BESTest. A vertical line represents the measure of the variable, in linear logits. The leftmost column locates each person's ability, from higher (top) to lower (bottom) ability. The rightmost column locates the relative difficulty of each item for this sample. A higher item measure (item 3a) reflects more difficulty in that item (higher score). By convention, the average difficulty of items in the test is set at 0 logits (indicated by M′), and participants with average ability are located at M. Horizontal dashed arrows indicate the 2 extreme threshold boundaries, and S and T represent, respectively, 1 and 2 standard deviations. Each point indicates one participant, and each hash mark indicates 2 participants. CSL-L=compensatory stepping lateral, left; CSL-R=compensatory stepping lateral, right; FRF=functional reach forward; H/T LS=hip/trunk lateral strength; SECF=stance with eyes closed, on foam surface; SL-L=one-leg stance, left; SL-R=one-leg stance, right; TUG=Timed “Up & Go” Test.

Figure 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 3.

Standard error of measurement (SE, expressed in logits) for the Rasch model person ability estimates and cumulative percentage of participants at each level of ability. About 30% of the sample had an SE of greater than 0.6 logit (from −4.42 to −2.08 logits and from 1.78 to 4.76 logits).

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

Category probability curves. The y-axis represents the probability (0–1) of responding to 1 of the 4 rating categories, and the x-axis represents the corresponding performance values, calculated as person ability minus item difficulty and expressed in logits. The 3 thresholds (vertical dashed lines)—that is, the ability levels at which the response to either of 2 adjacent categories was equally likely—were at −0.91, −0.44, and 1.35 logits.

Tables

Table 2.
Table 2.

Item-to-Total Correlations and Factor Analysis of the Brief-BESTest

Table 1.
Table 1.

Clinical Characteristics of Participants

Table 3.
Table 3.

Item Difficulty Measures and Goodness-of-Fit Statistics for the 8 Items of the Brief-BESTest

  • a SE=standard error.

  • b MnSq=mean square. Bold type indicates misfitting values.

PreviousNext
Back to top
Vol 96 Issue 10 Table of Contents
Physical Therapy: 96 (10)

Issue highlights

  • Our Future Selves: Unprecedented Opportunities
  • Toward a Transformed Understanding: From Pain and Movement to Pain With Movement
  • Virtual Reality for Stroke Rehabilitation
  • Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT): Modified Delphi Study
  • Agreement of Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy Classification in People With Extremity Conditions
  • High-Intensity Interval Training and Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training in Ambulatory Chronic Stroke: Feasibility Study
  • Therapeutic Ultrasound and Treadmill Training Suppress Peripheral Nerve Injury–Induced Pain in Rats
  • A Further Step to Develop Patient-Friendly Implementation Strategies for Virtual Reality–Based Rehabilitation in Patients With Acute Stroke
  • Transitions in the Embodied Experience After Stroke: Grounded Theory Study
  • Neck Posture Clusters and Their Association With Biopsychosocial Factors and Neck Pain in Australian Adolescents
  • Physical Therapists' Role in Health Promotion as Perceived by the Patient: Descriptive Survey
  • Finding the “Right-Size” Physical Therapy Workforce: International Perspective Across 4 Countries
  • Does the Brief-BESTest Meet Classical Test Theory and Rasch Analysis Requirements for Balance Assessment in People With Neurological Disorders?
  • Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and Oswestry Disability Index: Which Has Better Measurement Properties for Measuring Physical Functioning in Nonspecific Low Back Pain? Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
  • Responsiveness of the Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) in People With Subacute Stroke
  • Use of Rasch Analysis to Evaluate and Refine the Community Balance and Mobility Scale for Use in Ambulatory Community-Dwelling Adults Following Stroke
  • de Morton Mobility Index Is Feasible, Reliable, and Valid in Patients With Critical Illness
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on JCORE Reference.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Does the Brief-BESTest Meet Classical Test Theory and Rasch Analysis Requirements for Balance Assessment in People With Neurological Disorders?
(Your Name) has sent you a message from JCORE Reference
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the JCORE Reference web site.
Print
Does the Brief-BESTest Meet Classical Test Theory and Rasch Analysis Requirements for Balance Assessment in People With Neurological Disorders?
Elisabetta Bravini, Antonio Nardone, Marco Godi, Simone Guglielmetti, Franco Franchignoni, Andrea Giordano
Physical Therapy Oct 2016, 96 (10) 1610-1619; DOI: 10.2522/ptj.20150550

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Download Powerpoint
Save to my folders

Share
Does the Brief-BESTest Meet Classical Test Theory and Rasch Analysis Requirements for Balance Assessment in People With Neurological Disorders?
Elisabetta Bravini, Antonio Nardone, Marco Godi, Simone Guglielmetti, Franco Franchignoni, Andrea Giordano
Physical Therapy Oct 2016, 96 (10) 1610-1619; DOI: 10.2522/ptj.20150550
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Method
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Reliability and Validity of Force Platform Measures of Balance Impairment in Individuals With Parkinson Disease
  • Predictors of Reduced Frequency of Physical Activity 3 Months After Injury: Findings From the Prospective Outcomes of Injury Study
  • Effects of Locomotor Exercise Intensity on Gait Performance in Individuals With Incomplete Spinal Cord Injury
Show more Measurement

Subjects

  • Examination/Evaluation
    • Tests and Measurements
  • Neurology/Neuromuscular System
    • Neurology/Neuromuscular System: Other
    • Balance

Footer Menu 1

  • menu 1 item 1
  • menu 1 item 2
  • menu 1 item 3
  • menu 1 item 4

Footer Menu 2

  • menu 2 item 1
  • menu 2 item 2
  • menu 2 item 3
  • menu 2 item 4

Footer Menu 3

  • menu 3 item 1
  • menu 3 item 2
  • menu 3 item 3
  • menu 3 item 4

Footer Menu 4

  • menu 4 item 1
  • menu 4 item 2
  • menu 4 item 3
  • menu 4 item 4
footer second
footer first
Copyright © 2013 The HighWire JCore Reference Site | Print ISSN: 0123-4567 | Online ISSN: 1123-4567
advertisement bottom
Advertisement Top