Validity and test-retest reliability of a modified version of the upper quarter Y balance test in athletes with spinal cord injury and lower limb amputation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Upper Quarter Y Balance Test (YBT-UQ) assesses upper limb dynamic balance in able-bodied individuals but lacks a reliable version for those with disabilities. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to introduce a modified YBT-UQ (mYBT-UQ) for physically impaired individuals (PI) and establish its validity and reliability. METHODS: The study involved 33 male athletes aged 18-55, divided into three equal groups: able-bodied, spinal cord injury with trunk control (SCI), and below-the-knee amputation (BKA). To ensure test validity, able-bodied athletes completed both tests. Test-retest reliability was evaluated by repeating the mYBT-UQ seven days after the first test by PI groups. The validity was assessed using the Pearson correlation and Bland-Altman plot. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) (2,1), standard error of measurement (SEM), and the minimal detectable change with 95% confidence (MDC95%) were calculated to assess relative and absolute reliability. RESULTS: There were significant differences and excellent relationships between YBT-UQ and the mYBT-UQ. Also, the Bland-Altman plot showed minimal bias and an acceptable range of agreement. In athletes with BKA, the ICC (2,1) was above 0.90 for both limbs. The SEM ranged from 2.4%-2.7%, and MDC95% ranged from 6.7%-7.5%. In athletes with SCI, the ICC (2,1) ranged from 0.72-0.80. The SEM ranged from 3.1%-3.2% and MDC95% ranged from 8.6%-8.9%. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that the mYBT-UQ is a reliable test to assess upper quarter dynamic balance in athletes with SCI and BKA. However, regarding the small sample size of the study, there is a need to conduct other research to establish the validity of the test.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".