The Ziegler Test Is Reliable and Valid for Measuring Freezing of Gait in People With Parkinson Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine interrater and test-retest reliability of the Ziegler test to measure freezing of gait (FOG) severity in people with Parkinson disease. Secondary aims were to evaluate test validity and explore Ziegler test duration as a proxy FOG severity measure. METHODS: Physical therapists watched 36 videos of people with Parkinson disease and FOG perform the Ziegler test and rated FOG severity using the rating scale in real time. Two researchers rated 12 additional videos and repeated the ratings at least 1 week later. Interrater and test-retest reliability were calculated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Bland-Altman plots were used to visualize agreement between the researchers for test-retest reliability. Correlations between the Ziegler scores, Ziegler test duration, and percentage of time frozen (based on video annotations) were determined using Pearson r. RESULTS: Twenty-four physical therapists participated. Overall, the Ziegler test showed good interrater (ICC2,1 = 0.80; 95% CI = 0.65-0.92) and excellent test-retest (ICC3,1 = 0.91; 95% CI = 0.82-0.96) reliability when used to measure FOG. It was also a valid measure, with a high correlation (r = 0.72) between the scores and percentage of time frozen. Ziegler test duration was moderately correlated (r = 0.67) with percentage of time frozen and may be considered a proxy FOG severity measure. CONCLUSION: The Ziegler test is a reliable and valid tool to measure FOG when used by physical therapists in real time. Ziegler test duration may be used as a proxy for measuring FOG severity. IMPACT: Despite FOG being a significant contributor to falls and poor mobility in people with Parkinson disease, current tools to assess FOG are either not suitably responsive or too resource intensive for use in clinical settings. The Ziegler test is a reliable and valid measure of FOG, suitable for clinical use, and may be used by physical therapists regardless of their level of clinical experience.
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 | 0.001 | 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".