The Short Physical Performance Battery is a valid tool in survivors of critical illness: international clinimetric secondary analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Evaluate the clinimetric properties and clinical utility of the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) in survivors of critical illness up to 6 months post-hospital discharge.Materials and methods Clinimetric analysis of three international datasets (n = 488 ICU survivors) from the United States and Australia.Results At hospital discharge, the SPPB demonstrated moderate-to-excellent construct validity with the six-minute walk test (rho = 0.81, p < 0.001), Timed Up and Go (TUG) (rho = −0.87, p < 0.001), and dual TUG (rho = −0.75, p < 0.001); and fair-to-moderate construct validity with handgrip and quadriceps strength. At hospital discharge it predicted minimal to mild limitations (score 7–12) at 6 months post (AUC 0.78 [0.72–0.84]). Responsiveness was observed, with the largest effect size (0.72) between hospital discharge and 3 months. Minimal clinical difference (from distribution-based methods) ranged from 1.21 to 1.43 out of 12 across timepoints. Floor effects were present at hospital discharge (18.8%) and ceiling effects at 3- and 6-months post (26.5% and 28.1%). At 3 months post, participants with moderate-to-severe limitations (score 0–6) performed worse on physical and strength-based measures.Conclusions The SPPB is a valid tool that can be used to monitor physical function recovery. It may have the potential for prediction of physical limitations particularly at hospital discharge, however further validation is required.
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 | 0.009 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".