Development and initial psychometric properties of the timed upper limb assessment in older adults with Parkinson’s
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Upper limb dysfunction is common in people with Parkinson’s. This study aimed to pilot and establish the initial psychometric properties of the timed upper limb assessment (TULA), a 10-item timed functional upper limb assessment tool. Method: A prospective observational study was conducted with 381 participants (202 with Parkinson’s, 179 controls). The TULA was administered to both groups, with inter-rater reliability assessed in a subset ( n = 47). Principal component analysis examined structural validity, while convergent validity was explored through correlations with cognitive and motor assessments. Results: The TULA demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.81 for Parkinson’s group) and high inter-rater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) > 0.9). People with Parkinson’s took significantly longer to complete all items (mean (SD) 22.2 ± 7.5) compared to controls (16.8 ± 3.7, p < 0.001). The tool showed moderate correlation with the timed up and go test ( r = 0.56, p < 0.001), a significant low correlation with the Hoehn and Yahr Scale ( r = 0.44, p ⩽ 0.001) and a significant low correlation with both the Montreal Cognitive Assessment ( r = −0.37, p ⩽ 0.001) and the Mini Mental Status Examination ( r = −0.31, p ⩽ 0.001). Conclusion: This study provides an alternative functional upper limb assessment tool for people with Parkinson’s attending occupational therapy. Initial data have been provided to support the reliability and validity of the TULA.
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 | 0.000 | 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".