Clinical Utility of the 2-Minute Walk Test for Older Adults Living in Long-Term Care
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study's purposes were to examine the measurement properties of the 2-minute walk test (2MWT), to illustrate the use of reliability coefficients in clinical practice, and to estimate sample size for a subsequent validity study. METHOD: Sixteen residents of long-term care (LTC; mean age = 87 years) completed two 2MWTs with Rater A and two 2MWTs with Rater B on test days 1 and 2, approximately 1 week apart. On a third test day, subjects completed one trial of the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), timed up-and-go (TUG) test, and 6-minute walk test (6MWT) with Rater A. On 2 other test days, approximately 1 week apart, Rater A administered the 2MWT to five older adults living in a retirement facility. Absolute and relative reliability and concurrent and known-groups validity coefficients were calculated. RESULTS: No main effect for rater, trial, or occasion was found. Test-retest reliability estimates of 0.94 and 0.95 were obtained. The 2MWT demonstrated concurrent validity (r > or = 0.84) with the BBS, TUG, and 6MWT. Comparison of distance walked by LTC and retirement residents showed a difference of 72.9 m (95% CI: 44.2, 101.6). The results suggest that 90% of truly stable older adults will display random fluctuations in 2MWT performance within a boundary of 15 m. CONCLUSION: The 2MWT had sound measurement properties in this sample of LTC residents. Based on our results, 24 subjects would be required for a subsequent hypothesis-testing validity study.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it