Interrater and intrarater reliability of the wheelchair skills test version 4.2 for power wheelchair users
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to estimate the interrater and intrarater reliability of the Wheelchair Skills Test (WST) Version 4.2 for powered wheelchairs operated by adult users. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cohort study with a convenience sample of occupational therapists (n = 10). For the main outcome measure, participants viewed and scored eight videos of adult power wheelchair users completing the 30 skills of the WST Version 4.2 on two occasions, a minimum of two weeks apart. Using these scores, we calculated intraclass correlation coefficients to estimate interrater and intrarater reliability. RESULTS: The interrater reliability intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.940 (95%CI 0.862-0.985). Intrarater reliability intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.923 to 0.998. CONCLUSIONS: The WST Version 4.2 has excellent interrater and intrarater reliability and is a reliable tool for use in clinical and research practice to evaluate a power wheelchair user's skill capacity. Implications for Rehabilitation The Wheelchair Skills Test for Powered Wheelchair Users (WST-P 4.2) is a useful addition to the clinical tools available for clinicians who assess and train for powered wheelchair use. The WST-P 4.2 has excellent reliability and potential for clinical use as a pre-post measure of powered wheelchair skills. Clinicians using the WST-P 4.2 should attempt to maintain consistent scoring procedures, particularly for those skills that may require subjective assessment of skill safety.
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 | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".