Responsiveness of the movement ability measure: A self-report instrument proposed for assessing the effectiveness of physical therapy intervention: Invited commentary

Physical Therapy

Volumn 87, Issue 7, 2007, Pages 927-928

  Martin, RobRoy L ^a  

^a DUQUESNE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BODY MOVEMENT; EVALUATION; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; HUMAN; MOVEMENT ABILITY MEASURE; NOTE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; SELF REPORT; STANDARD; VALIDITY; INSTRUMENTATION; MOVEMENT (PHYSIOLOGY); PHYSIOTHERAPY; PSYCHOMETRY; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

HUMANS; MOVEMENT; PHYSICAL THERAPY MODALITIES; PSYCHOMETRICS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 34347360765     PISSN: 00319023     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2522/ptj.2006.0182.0197.0198.ic2     Document Type: Note

References (7)

1. Kirshner B, Guyatt G. A methodological framework for assessing health indices. J Chronic Dis. 1985;38:27-36.
2. Martin RL, Irrgang JJ, Lalonde KA, Conti SF. Current concepts review: foot and ankle outcome instruments. Foot Ankle Int. 2006;27:383-390.
3. Stratford PW, Binkley JM, Solomon P, et al. Defining the minimum level of detectable change for the Roland-Morris Questionnaire. Phys Ther. 1996;76:359-365; discussion 366-368.
4. Deyo RA, Centor RM. Assessing the responsiveness of functional scales to clinical change: an analogy to diagnostic test performance. J Chronic Dis. 1986;39:897-906.
5. Beaton DE. Understanding the relevance of measured change through studies of responsiveness. Spine. 2000;25:3192-3199.
6. Hambleton RK, Jones RW. Comparison of classical test theory and item response theory and their applications to test development. Education Measurement: Issues and Practices. 1993;12:38-47.
7. Messick S. Meaning an values in test validation: science and ethics of assessment. Educational Researcher. 1989;18:5-11.