↓ Skip to main content

The Shoulder Function Index (SFInX): evaluation of its measurement properties in people recovering from a proximal humeral fracture

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Shoulder Function Index (SFInX): evaluation of its measurement properties in people recovering from a proximal humeral fracture
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12891-016-1138-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alexander T. M. van de Water, Megan Davidson, Nora Shields, Matthew C. Evans, Nicholas F. Taylor

Abstract

Concerns about test administration, reliability estimations, content and internal structure (dimensionality) of available shoulder measures for people with proximal humeral facture led to the development of a new clinician-observed outcome measure: the Shoulder Function Index (SFInX). The SFInX measures shoulder function by judgement of actual ability to perform daily tasks in which the shoulder is involved. Patients and health professionals had input into the instrument development, and Rasch analysis was used to create a unidimensional, interval-level scale. This study comprehensively evaluated the measurement properties of the SFInX in people recovering from a proximal humeral fracture. Data were collected on 92 people [79 women, mean age 63.5 years (SD13.9)] who sustained a proximal humeral fracture within the previous year on three occasions to allow for evaluation of the following measurement properties: construct validity (convergent, discriminant and known-groups validity), longitudinal validity (responsiveness), intra-rater reliability (one week retest interval), and inter-rater reliability (n = 20 subgroup; two independent raters). Comparative measures were Constant Score and Disabilities of the Arm Shoulder and Hand (DASH) and discriminative measure was a mental status questionnaire. Minimal clinically important difference, floor and ceiling effects and feasibility of the SFInX were also evaluated. A priori hypotheses were formulated where applicable. Results for construct validity testing supported hypothesised relationships (convergent validity r = 0.75-0.89 (Constant Score and DASH); discriminant validity r = -0.08 (mental status); known-groups validity r = 0.50). For longitudinal validity, lower correlations (r = 0.40-0.49) than hypothesised (r = 0.50-0.70) were found. The SFInX scores changed more (10.3 points) than other scales, which could indicate that the SFInX is more responsive than the comparative measures. Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability found ICCs of 0.96 (95 % CI 0.94-0.97) and 0.91 (95 % CI 0.63-0.97) respectively, with low measurement error (SEM = 3.9-5.8/100). A change of 11-12 points (out of 100) was indicative of a clinically important difference. The SFInX is a feasible outcome measure which clinicians can use to reliably measure and detect clinically important changes in the construct of 'shoulder function', the ability to perform activities in which the shoulder is involved, in people recovering from a proximal humeral fracture.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 16%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Other 4 7%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 3 5%
Researcher 3 5%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 21 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 9%
Computer Science 2 4%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Sports and Recreations 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 25 45%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 July 2016.
All research outputs
#4,329,412
of 8,154,593 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#1,268
of 2,077 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,484
of 257,607 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#36
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,154,593 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,077 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 257,607 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.