The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Improving the sensitivity of the Barthel Index for stroke rehabilitation
Abstract
The Barthel Index is considered to be the best of the ADL measurement scales. However, there are some scales that are more sensitive to small changes in functional independence than the Barthel Index. The sensitivity of the Barthel Index can be improved by expanding the number of categories used to record improvement in each ADL function. Suggested changes to the scoring of the Barthel Index, and guidelines for determining the level of independence are presented. These modifications and guidelines were applied in the assessment of 258 first stroke patients referred for inpatient comprehensive rehabilitation in Brisbane, Australia during 1984 calendar year. The modified scoring of the Barthel Index achieved greater sensitivity and improved reliability than the original version, without causing additional difficulty or affecting the implementation time. The internal consistency reliability coefficient for the modified scoring of the Barthel Index was 0.90, compared to 0.87 for the original scoring.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Platz, T., Pinkowski, C., van Wijck, F., Kim, I.-H., di Bella, P., & Johnson, G. (2005) · Clinical Rehabilitation · doi:10.1191/0269215505cr832oa · Cited by 894
Martínez-Velilla, N., Casas-Herrero, A., Zambom-Ferraresi, F., Sáez de Asteasu, M. L., Lucia, A., Galbete, A., García-Baztán, A., Alonso-Renedo, J., González-Glaría, B., Gonzalo-Lázaro, M., et al. (2019) · JAMA Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.4869 · Cited by 481
Low mobility during hospitalization and functional decline in older adults
Zisberg, A., Shadmi, E., Sinoff, G., Gur‐Yaish, N., Srulovici, E., & Admi, H. (2011) · Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.03276.x · Cited by 393
Issues for selection of outcome measures in stroke rehabilitation: ICF Participation
Salter, K., Jutai, J., Teasell, R., Foley, N., BItensky, J., & Bayley, M. (2005) · Disability and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1080/0963828040008552 · Cited by 313
Contemporary Outcome Measures in Acute Stroke Research: Choice of Primary Outcome Measure
Lees, K. R., Bath, P. M. W., Schellinger, P. D., Kerr, D. M., Fulton, R., Hacke, W., Matchar, D., Sehra, R., & Toni, D. (2012) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/strokeaha.111.641423 · Cited by 242
Metadata
- Authors
- Shah, S., Vanclay, F., & Cooper, B.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1989-01
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 703-709
- ISSN
- 0895-4356 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2004319861
- Cited by
- 2,527
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Improving the sensitivity of the Barthel Index for stroke rehabilitation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/0895-4356(89)90065-6
- The paper
- Shah, S., Vanclay, F., & Cooper, B. (1989). Improving the sensitivity of the Barthel Index for stroke rehabilitation. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(89)90065-6
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
