Search

Background and aims: Performance-based tests of mobility or physical function such as the Timed Up and Go (TUG), gait speed, chair-rise, and single-leg stance (SLS) are often administered using different protocols in aging populations, however, the reliability of their assessment protocols is not often considered. The purpose of this study was to examine the reliabilities of frequently used assessment protocols for the TUG, gait speed, chair-rise, and SLS in different age groups. Methods: We administered the following assessment protocols in an age-stratified (50–64, 65–74, 75+ years) sample of participants (N = 147) from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA): TUG fast pace and TUG normal pace: TUG-cognitive counting backwards by ones and counting back by threes, gait speed with 3-m and 4-m course, chair-rise with arms crossed and allowing the use of arms, and SLS using preferred leg or both legs—on two occasions within 1 week. We assessed the relative (intra-class correlation) and absolute reliability (standard error of measurement, SEM and minimal detectable change, MDC) for each protocol variation and provided recommendations based on relative reliability. Results: For participants aged 50–64 years, our results suggest better reliability for TUG fast-pace compared with normal-pace (ICC and 95% CI 0.70; 0.41–0.85 versus 0.38; 0.12–0.59). The reliability values for 3-m gait speed were potentially higher than for 4-m gait speed (ICC 0.75; 0.67–0.82 versus 0.64; 0.54–0.73) and values for chair-rise suggested better reliability allowing participants to use their arms than with arms crossed (ICC 0.79; 0.66–0.86 versus 0.64; 0.45–0.77) for participants overall. For participants aged 75+ years, ICCs for SLS with the preferred leg showed better reliability than for both legs (ICC = 0.62–0.79 versus 0.30–0.39). Conclusions and discussion: These reliability data and the recommendations can help guide the selection of the most appropriate performance-based test protocols for measuring mobility in middle-aged and older community-dwelling adults. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cross-sectional study. Adhering to test administration and standardized instructions is important for attainment of accurate and reliable results in performance-based tests. To determine test-retest and interrater reliability of standardized translated instruction (St-TI) and spontaneously translated instruction (Sp-TI) of a hand function test. Four raters and seventy-two subjects were divided into 2 groups: St-TI group, direct administration of the Hong Kong Chinese version of the Jebsen Hand Function Test to subjects by raters; and Sp-TI group, spontaneously translating the Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test from English into Chinese by raters. Test-retest and interrater reliability were calculated based on instruction time by the rater and performance time by the subject. Test-retest and interrater reliability of instruction time by rater for St-TI has intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.35 to 0.70 and 0.24 to 0.55, respectively, whereas that for Sp-TI was −0.50 to 0.18 and −0.09 to 0.51, respectively. Test-retest and interrater reliability of performance time by subject for St-TI was 0.56 to 0.84 and 0.33 to 0.78, respectively, whereas that for Sp-TI was 0.54 to 0.87 and 0.35 to 0.77, respectively. Sp-TI had two test-retest minimal detectable change percent values that fell within the acceptable range (subtest 3 = 21.9% and subtest 6 = 25.7%). Instruction time by rater for Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test subtests had generally poor to moderate test-retest and interrater reliability for both St-TI and Sp-TI. Performance time by subject generally had moderate to good reliability, except for St-TI with poor to good interrater reliability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We addressed potential test takers’ preferences for women or men as examiners as well as how examiners were perceived depending on their gender. We employed an online design with 375 students who provided preferences for and ratings of examiners based on short video clips. The clips showed four out of 15 psychologists who differed in age (young vs. middle-aged) and gender giving an introduction to a fictional intelligence test session. Employing multivariate multilevel analyses we found female examiners to be perceived as more social competent and middle-aged examiners being perceived as more competent. Data analyses revealed a significant preference for choosing women as examiners. Results were discussed with reference to test performance and fairness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Gazi University Journal of Gazi Educational Faculty (GUJGEF) is the property of Gazi University Journal of Gazi Educational Faculty (GUJGEF) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Education / Revue Canadienne de l'Éducation is the property of Canadian Society for the Study of Education and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Multiple analyses of results are presented from the Statics Concept Inventory, a multiple choice test assessing conceptual knowledge in engineering statics. Results are based on the administration of this test to 1331 students in ten classes at seven US universities during the 2004-2005 academic year. Evidence confirming the validity and reliability of the test is offered Detailed comparisons are made between inventory scores and performance on course examinations, including evaluations of how inventory sub-scores on specific concepts correlate with performance on certain types of problems. Finally, based on analysis of the prevalence of various answer choices, common misconceptions are identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]