Reliability of the 3-Meter Backward Walk Test and Association with Functional Gait Assess-ment in Individuals with Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the context of evaluating physical function in individuals with stroke, the 3-meter backward walk test (3MBWT) emerges as a potential tool of interest. The purpose of this study was to assess the test-retest reliability and construct validity of the 3MBWT and its correlation with falling incidents. Conducted in a neurological rehabilitation center, 35 ambulatory individuals with stroke were enrolled within a month post-stroke onset. These participants, with a Functional Ambulation Category score of ≥4, underwent the 3MBWT, Functional Gait Assessment (FGA), 10-Meter Walk Test (10MWT), and 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT) three times by different physiotherapists. Results indicated the 3MBWT displayed high reliability (r=0.97-0.98) and showed significant construct validity with other established walking tests like the 6MWT (r=-0.78) and 10MWT (r=0.71), with a moderate correlation to the FGA (r=-0.54). No marked differences in test outcomes were observed between participants based on their fall history. Conclusively, the 3MBWT proves to be highly reliable and validates well with existing walking function assessments for stroke patients, suggesting its potential as a time-efficient alternative.
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 | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".