Structural validity and internal consistency of an ecological observation‐based assessment, the Activities of Daily Living Profile
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Direct observation of everyday task performance is considered the most accurate measure of independence for individuals with executive function impairments. However, few observation-based measures have been shown to have sound psychometric qualities and be clinically applicable. The objective of this study was to investigate the Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Profile's structural validity using exploratory factor analyses and internal consistency in order to identify the minimum set of tasks required to achieve reliable scores in each of three ADL environments (personal, home and community). METHODS: Ninety-one persons with a severe traumatic brain injury aged 16-40 years (convenience sample) were recruited from a university affiliated level 1 trauma hospital. The 17 observation-based tasks of the ADL Profile were administered by one of five occupational therapists, either in the hospital or in the subjects' home and community environments. This measure of independence considers goal formulation, planning, carrying out and verifying goal attainment. RESULTS: Exploratory factor analysis indicated the unidimensionality of the 17 tasks of the ADL Profile. A single factor explained more than 80% of the common variation, which in this case is the concept of independence. Internal consistency of task scores is very high (0.955), suggesting redundancy of the tasks. Approaches used to reduce the number of items, and to optimise the clinical applicability of the tool, showed that a minimum of two tasks per each of three environments (personal, home, community) is required to obtain reliable results that respect the tool's internal structure. Each assessment should contain both simple and familiar and more novel and complex tasks. CONCLUSIONS: Findings show that the ADL Profile is a valid and clinically applicable observation-based measure of independence that considers four important task-related components: goal formulation, planning, carrying out and verifying goal attainment.
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 | 0.010 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".