The Community Balance and Mobility Scale-a balance measure for individuals with traumatic brain injury
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
OBJECTIVE: To provide evidence for the validity and reliability of a new outcome measure of balance, the Community Balance and Mobility Scale, developed for the ambulatory individual with traumatic brain injury. DESIGN: A validity and reliability study. SETTING: Acute care, in- and outpatient rehabilitation and day hospital settings. SUBJECTS: Two convenience samples (n=36, 32) of ambulatory patients with traumatic brain injury. MAIN MEASURES: The content and construct validity, test-retest, inter- and intra-rater reliability and internal consistency of the Community Balance and Mobility Scale. RESULTS: Content validity was demonstrated by the involvement of patients with traumatic brain injury (n=7) and clinicians (n=17) in the process of item generation and by physical therapists' ratings of item relevance. Further support is the correlation of the Community Balance and Mobility Scale scores with physical therapists' global balance ratings of the patient (r=0.62). Construct validity was supported by the ability of the measure to differentiate between patients along the continuum of care and also by comparisons with maximal walking velocity (r=0.64). Patients who scored greater than or less than 50 on the balance measure demonstrated significantly different Community Integration Questionnaire scores (P=0.004). The Community Balance and Mobility Scale demonstrated intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) of 0.977, 0.977, 0.975 and Cronbach's alpha of 0.96 for intra-, inter-, test-retest reliability and internal consistency, respectively. CONCLUSION: The Community Balance and Mobility Scale is a valid and reliable outcome measure for the ambulatory individual with traumatic brain injury.
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 | 0.012 | 0.019 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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