MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985217450 · doi:10.1159/000104830

Development and Psychometric Properties of the Ambulatory Self-Confidence Questionnaire

2007· article· en· W1985217450 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGerontology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmbulatoryConfidence intervalConstruct validityActivities of daily livingTest (biology)GerontologyGeriatricsPsychologyMedicineReliability (semiconductor)PsychometricsPhysical therapyClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Ambulation is one of the most important elements of mobility, and difficulty with ambulation is often cited as a common problem among older adults. Self-report assessments (e.g. walking confidence) provide complementary information to performance tests (e.g. the Timed Up and Go Test, TUG) because they offer data not obtainable from a test of walking performance. OBJECTIVE: To develop and assess the reliability and the content and construct validity of the Ambulatory Self-Confidence Questionnaire (ASCQ), a new measure of walking confidence. METHODS: This descriptive methodological study used data from two samples. The first sample included 31 individuals (13 community-dwelling older adults, aged 65 years and older and 18 academics, clinicians, and researchers working in the area of ambulatory care and geriatrics and medicine) who assisted in establishing the content validity. Participants were asked to complete two surveys to assess the content of the ASCQ. For the second sample 101 community-dwelling older adults (>/=65 years old) were recruited, from community centers, senior day centers, and geriatric clinics in order to determine the reliability and construct validity of the ASCQ. The ASCQ was completed twice over a 2-week interval while other measures such as the TUG, the 6-Min Walk Test (6MWT), the Activities-specific Balance Confidence scale (ABC) and the Instrumental Activities of Daily Living scale (IADL) were completed once in order to assess validity. RESULTS: Group consensus was obtained for a 22-item version of the ASCQ. Of the 101 participants recruited for the project, 67 provided complete information for test-retest reliability and 91 provided information for assessment of validity. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.95) and test-retest reliability (ICC(1.1) = 0.92; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87, 0.95) were excellent. The ASCQ was: (1) highly correlated with the ABC scale (rho = 0.87); moderately correlated with the TUG (rho = -0.46) and the 6MWT (rho = 0.36); and weakly correlated with the IADL (rho = 0.27). CONCLUSION: The ASCQ is reliable and support for validity is evident for this sample of community-dwelling older adults. Further studies are needed to assess the reliability and validity in a frailer older adult sample. The ASCQ may be useful to clinicians and researchers alike for determining an older adult's confidence with their walking ability.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score0.231

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it