International Society of Wheelchair Professionals’ Basic Manual Wheelchair Service Provision Knowledge Test Version 2: Assessment of preliminary psychometric evidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Valid and reliable assessment tools to test wheelchair service personnel/provider knowledge are needed to support good practice. The International Society of Wheelchair Professionals’ Basic Manual Wheelchair Service Provision Test (Version 1) has been widely used across contexts and settings to assess the knowledge of personnel who provide manual wheelchair services. Test Version 2 has been recently developed according to current evidence. The objectives of this study were to assess the internal consistency reliability and construct validity for the Test Version 2. A convenience sample of 156 test-takers completed an online test with 170 multiple-choice questions. Internal consistency was measured using Cronbach’s alpha, which ranged from 0.58 to 0.91 across different domains. Most questions (55.9%) were classified as “easy,” while 28.2% were “medium” difficulty. Regression analysis showed that test-taker characteristics, particularly years of experience, explained nearly half of the variation in test scores (R2 = 0.47). The findings provide preliminary evidence supporting the test’s reliability and construct validity.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".