Reliability and validity of a mobile tablet for assessing left/right judgements
| Autor: | Michelle N. McDonnell, G. Lorimer Moseley, Daniela K. Peto, Felicity A Braithwaite, Susan Hillier, Lindy J. Williams, Hayley B. Leake |
|---|---|
| Přispěvatelé: | Williams, Lindy J, Braithwaite, Felicity A, Leake, Hayley B, McDonnell, Michelle N, Peto, Daniela K, Moseley, G Lorimer, Hillier, Susan L |
| Rok vydání: | 2019 |
| Předmět: |
Adult
Male Computer science education Concurrent validity Physical Therapy Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation Random order Disability Evaluation 03 medical and health sciences motor imagery 0302 clinical medicine Motor imagery Task Performance and Analysis Reaction Time Humans body schema concurrent validity 030212 general & internal medicine Reliability (statistics) Simulation Age Factors Reproducibility of Results Middle Aged humanities Test (assessment) Body schema Computers Handheld Female left/right judgement 030217 neurology & neurosurgery |
| Zdroj: | Musculoskeletal Science and Practice. 40:45-52 |
| ISSN: | 2468-7812 |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.msksp.2019.01.010 |
| Popis: | Background Left/right judgement (LRJ) of body parts is commonly used to assess the ability to perform implicit motor imagery and the integrity of brain-grounded maps of the body. Clinically, LRJ are often undertaken using a mobile tablet, but the concurrent validity and reliability of this approach has not yet been established. Objectives To evaluate the concurrent validity and test-retest reliability of a mobile tablet for assessing LRJ. Method Participants completed LRJ for 50 hand images (Experiment 1), and 40 back, foot, or neck images (Experiment 2) using a mobile tablet and desktop computer in random order. Participants in Experiment 2 performed a repeat test the following day to assess test-retest reliability. Accuracy and response time (RT) were recorded. Results Twenty participants aged 55.3 (±6.7) years in Experiment 1, and 37 participants aged 38.2 (±12.3) years in Experiment 2, were recruited. Concurrent validity of the mobile tablet was good to excellent for hand judgements (ICC 3,1 = 0.836 for RT; ICC = 0.909 for accuracy), and was good for back, foot, and neck judgements (ICC = 0.781 for accuracy; ICC = 0.880 for RT). Test-retest reliability of the mobile tablet was good to excellent (ICC = 0.824 for accuracy; ICC = 0.903 for RT). Conclusions The mobile tablet demonstrated good to excellent concurrent validity with the desktop computer in two separate samples. The mobile tablet also demonstrated good to excellent test-retest reliability. The mobile tablet for LRJ is a valid alternative to the original desktop version. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full Text from ScienceDirect