Development and Preliminary Validation of a Stroke Physical Activity Questionnaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective. The aim of the current study was to develop and then to determine preliminary validity of a physical activity questionnaire specifically designed for ambulatory, chronic stroke patients. Methods. This cross-sectional study recruited 92 chronic stroke patients. In Phase I, the SPAQ was developed and its content validity index (CVI) determined. In Phase II, we examined (1) the concurrent validity of SPAQ vs. the International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Short Form (IPAQ-SF); (2) the convergent validity of SPAQ vs. the Functional Ambulation Category (FAC), vs. the six-minute walk test (6-MWT), vs. the timed up and go test (TUGT), vs. the Motricity Index, vs. the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), and vs. the Modified Rankin Scale (MRS); and (3) the discriminant validity of the SPAQ vs. the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). The concurrent validity and convergent and divergent validity were analysed using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient. The agreement between the SPAQ and IPAQ-SF was assessed using the Kappa statistic. Results. The SPAQ has 12 items in 3 main components which covers low (7 items), moderate (3 items), and vigorous (2 items) physical activity. The SPAQ had a CVI of 0.93. Spearman’s correlation coefficient ( rs ) for SPAQ vs. IPAQ-SF was 0.53 (p < 0.001). The SPAQ yielded substantial agreement with the IPAQ-SF (Kappa = 0.65). For convergent validity, the SPAQ had a moderate correlation with the 6-MWT, MI, NIHSS, FAC, TUGT, and MRS (p < 0.05). For discriminant validity, the SPAQ was not correlated with the MoCA ( rs = 0.061, p = 0.68). Conclusion. The SPAQ can be used to practically assess physical activity in chronic stroke patients, and it has acceptable psychometric properties which are comparable to other standard physical activity questionnaires. Future work should determine the validity of the SPAQ using an objective device such as an accelerometer.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".