Reliability and validity of the shortened Singapore versions of the Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Upper limb deficits are common sequelae after a stroke and negatively affect daily living and quality of life. The use of outcome measures to evaluate upper limb function is essential to assess sensorimotor recovery and to determine the effectiveness of rehabilitation. The aim of this study was to estimate the construct validity and inter-rater reliability of three shortened versions of the Singapore version of the Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory (CAHAI-SG) comprising seven, eight, and nine test items. The sample consisted of 55 inpatients with acute/subacute stroke to whom the CAHAI-SG, Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) and the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) were administered. To estimate convergent and discriminative construct validity, Spearman's rank correlation coefficient and 95% confidence intervals were computed for CAHAI-SG scores with FMA-UE and ARAT scores. Reliability was estimated using intraclass correlation coefficient (relative reliability) and the standard error of measurement (absolute reliability). Convergent validity with the FMA-UE was 0.79, 0.80, and 0.81 for seven-item, eight-item, and nine-item versions of the CAHAI-SG, respectively, and 0.81 with the ARAT for all shortened versions. Discriminative validity with the FMA-UE pain subscale was between 0.37 and 0.38. The absolute reliability was 3.09, 3.65, and 3.98, and relative reliability was 0.96, 0.95, and 0.96 for the seven-item, eight-item, and nine-item versions, respectively. All shortened versions of the CAHAI-SG demonstrated similar psychometric properties to the full (13 item) version, meaning clinicians may use these shorter versions that require less time to administer and score.
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| 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".