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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Interrater and test-retest reliability and validity of the Norwegian version of the BESTest and mini-BESTest in people with increased risk of falling
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Geriatrics, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12877-017-0480-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Charlotta Hamre, Pernille Botolfsen, Gro Gujord Tangen, Jorunn L. Helbostad |
| Abstract |
The Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) was developed to assess underlying systems for balance control in order to be able to individually tailor rehabilitation interventions to people with balance disorders. A short form, the Mini-BESTest, was developed as a screening test. The study aimed to assess interrater and test-retest reliability of the Norwegian version of the BESTest and the Mini-BESTest in community-dwelling people with increased risk of falling and to assess concurrent validity with the Fall Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I), and it was an observational study with a cross-sectional design. Forty-two persons with increased risk of falling (elderly over 65 years of age, persons with a history of stroke or Multiple Sclerosis) were assessed twice by two raters. Relative reliability was analysed with Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC), and absolute reliability with standard error of measurement (SEM) and smallest detectable change (SDC). Concurrent validity was assessed against the FES-I using Spearman's rho. The BESTest showed very good interrater reliability (ICC = 0.98, SEM = 1.79, SDC95 = 5.0) and test-retest reliability (rater A/rater B = ICC = 0.89/0.89, SEM = 3.9/4.3, SDC95 = 10.8/11.8). The Mini-BESTest also showed very good interrater reliability (ICC = 0.95, SEM = 1.19, SDC95 = 3.3) and test-retest reliability (rater A/rater B = ICC = 0.85/0.84, SEM = 1.8/1.9, SDC95 = 4.9/5.2). The correlations were moderate between the FES-I and both the BESTest and the Mini-BESTest (Spearman's rho -0.51 and-0.50, p < 0.01). The BESTest and its short form, the Mini-BESTest, showed very good interrater and test-retest reliability when assessed in a heterogeneous sample of people with increased risk of falling. The concurrent validity measured against the FES-I showed moderate correlation. The results are comparable with earlier studies and indicate that the Norwegian versions can be used in daily clinic and in research. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 169 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 169 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 32 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 23 | 14% |
| Researcher | 9 | 5% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 4% |
| Other | 35 | 21% |
| Unknown | 54 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 47 | 28% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 14% |
| Sports and Recreations | 11 | 7% |
| Neuroscience | 7 | 4% |
| Engineering | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 18 | 11% |
| Unknown | 57 | 34% |
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 22 April 2017.
All research outputs
#20,414,746
of 22,965,074 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#2,883
of 3,216 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,868
of 310,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#36
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,965,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,216 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 310,204 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.