Development, Reliability, and Validity of the Multiple Errands Test Home Version (MET–Home) in Adults With Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to perform initial psychometric analysis of the Multiple Errands Test Home Version (MET-Home), which was designed to assess the influence of poststroke executive dysfunction on in-home task performance. METHOD: We examined the reliability and validity of the MET-Home in adults with stroke (n = 23) and individually matched control participants (n = 23). All participants completed a series of assessments during a single in-home visit. RESULTS: Notable differences in MET-Home subscores were discovered between participants with stroke and control participants. Participants with stroke omitted more tasks, broke more rules, passed by tasks more often, and were less efficient than matched control participants. The MET-Home demonstrated evidence of adequate internal consistency, excellent interrater reliability, and significant moderate associations with several tests. CONCLUSION: This preliminary study suggests that the MET-Home differentiates between adults with stroke and matched control participants. The MET-Home provides evidence of initial reliability and validity among adults with stroke.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".