13-Metre Walk Test Applied to the Elderly with Musculoskeletal Impairment: Validity Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine concurrent validity and known group validity for the 13-metre walk test. Methods: Preoperative data were collected from a sample of elderly individuals awaiting total hip replacement. The measures used were the Timed Up & Go Test, 13-metre walk test, 6-minute walk test, Stair Performance Measure, and the three subscales from the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Results: Scores on the 13-metre walk test were significantly correlated with each of the other functional outcome measures, although the magnitude of the correlations with the WOMAC subscales was modest. Subjects performed the 13-metre walk test at a greater velocity than the 6-minute walk test (p < .01). Individuals with gait aids performed more poorly than those without (p < .01). Conclusions: The findings of this study support concurrent validity and known group validity for the 13-metre walk test. Information regarding additional psychometric characteristics, that is, the interrater and intrarater reliability and responsiveness of the 13-metre walk test, would be valuable to further support its use.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".