Psychometric Properties of the Outpatient Physical Therapy Improvement in Movement Assessment Log (OPTIMAL) in Patients With Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Replication Study With Additional Findings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Outpatient Physical Therapy Improvement in Movement Assessment Log (OPTIMAL) is a recently developed self-report outcome instrument designed to measure the extent of activity limitation as defined by the World Health Organization. OBJECTIVE: The purposes of the study were to replicate some aspects of the original study of the OPTIMAL Difficulty and Confidence scales and to conduct additional psychometric tests. DESIGN: A cross-sectional design was used in the study. METHODS: Of a total of 1,150 patients who received treatment at 4 outpatient centers over the study period, 1,030 patients were recruited for this study and completed the OPTIMAL instrument and previously validated region-specific functional status measures. A variety of analytic methods were used to examine the extent of redundancy between the OPTIMAL Difficulty and Confidence scales, as well as the internal consistency reliability, standard error of measurement, known-groups validity, and convergent validity of OPTIMAL Difficulty Scale scores. RESULTS: The OPTIMAL Difficulty and Confidence scale scores were found in a factor analysis to be load-based on anatomical region rather than on difficulty and confidence concepts. Internal consistency reliability for the subscales of the Confidence Scale varied and was .80 or higher for the lower-extremity subscale but .50 or less for the trunk and upper-extremity subscales. LIMITATIONS: Only cross-sectional relationships were examined, and another pure measure of activity limitation was not used for comparison. CONCLUSIONS: The findings generally did not support the psychometric properties of the OPTIMAL instrument. Although not conclusive, the data suggested that the OPTIMAL Difficulty and Confidence scales demonstrate substantial overlap. Reliability was generally low, with the exception of the lower-extremity subscale. Scores for the subscales of the Difficulty Scale differentiated among patients with lower-extremity versus trunk or upper-extremity diagnoses, but associations with previously validated region-specific measures were generally weak or absent. Clinicians treating outpatients with musculoskeletal disorders should consider alternative measures when attempting to quantify the extent of activity limitations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".