Concurrent and Discriminant Validity of the Star Excursion Balance Test for Military Personnel With Lateral Ankle Sprain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: The Star Excursion Balance Test (SEBT) has frequently been used to measure motor control and residual functional deficits at different stages of recovery from lateral ankle sprain (LAS) in various populations. However, the validity of the measure used to characterize performance--the maximal reach distance (MRD) measured by visual estimation--is still unknown. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the concurrent validity of the MRD in the SEBT estimated visually vs the MRD measured with a 3D motion-capture system and evaluate and compare the discriminant validity of 2 MRD-normalization methods (by height or by lower-limb length) in participants with or without LAS (n = 10 per group). RESULTS: There is a high concurrent validity and a good degree of accuracy between the visual estimation measurement and the MRD gold-standard measurement for both groups and under all conditions. The Cohen d ratios between groups and MANOVA products were higher when computed from MRD data normalized by height. CONCLUSION: The results support the concurrent validity of visual estimation of the MRD and the use of the SEBT to evaluate motor control. Moreover, normalization of MRD data by height appears to increase the discriminant validity of this test.
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 | 0.004 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".