Validity and responsiveness of the Rehabilitation Activities Profile (RAP) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the internal consistency, validity and responsiveness of the Rehabilitation Activities Profile (RAP; a rehabilitation tool structuring the multidisciplinary team care process) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: In 85 rheumatoid arthritis patients admitted to a rheumatology clinic the RAP was applied at admission, at discharge, and six weeks thereafter. Additional assessments included measures of physical and psychological functioning, disease activity and quality of life. The internal consistency of the RAP was determined with Cronbach's alpha. Associations between the RAP and other outcome measures were determined by Spearman rank correlation coefficients. Responsiveness measures included the standardized response mean (SRM), effect size (ES) and responsiveness ratio (RR). RESULTS: Cronbach's alpha of the RAP total score was 0.78. The RAP total score correlated significantly with all other outcome measures. The mean RAP total score improved from 15.2 to 13.2 at discharge (change -2.0; 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.4 to -0.7) and to 11.5 (change -3.7; 95% CI -3.9 to -1.5) six weeks thereafter. The responsiveness of the RAP total score was low (standardized response mean -0.34, effect size -0.30) to high (responsiveness ratio -0.87) at discharge and moderate (standardized response mean -0.54, effect size -0.55) to high (responsiveness ratio -1.56) six weeks thereafter. CONCLUSIONS: The RAP appeared to be an internally consistent, valid and responsive measure to reflect limitations on the level of activities and participation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis admitted for multidisciplinary team care.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".