The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Psychometric properties of a computerized and hand-reaction time tests in older adults using long-term facilities with and without mild cognitive impairment
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Previous studies have shown that the simple RDT-S can be a reliable instrument for collecting RT data in older adults living in the community [21] and in older adults with and without cognitive impairment living in institutions [22].”
From Validity and reliability of a ruler drop test to measure dual-task reaction time, choice reaction time and discrimination reaction time (2024) · cites this paper as [22]
In the citing paper
“Another study developed with elderly people attending institutions showed good reliability of the RDT-S for elderly without cognitive impairment (ICC = 0.84) and with cognitive impairment (ICC = 0.80) [22].”
From Validity and reliability of a ruler drop test to measure dual-task reaction time, choice reaction time and discrimination reaction time (2024) · cites this paper as [22]
In the citing paper
“Another study developed with elderly people attending institutions showed good reliability of the RDT-S for elderly without cognitive impairment (ICC = 0.84) and with cognitive impairment (ICC = 0.80) [22].”
From Validity and reliability of a ruler drop test to measure dual-task reaction time, choice reaction time and discrimination reaction time (2024) · cites this paper as [22]
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
Cites
A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research
Koo, T. K., & Li, M. Y. (2016) · Journal of Chiropractic Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012 · Cited by 31,709
The processing-speed theory of adult age differences in cognition
Salthouse, T. A. (1996) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.103.3.403 · Cited by 5,902
Long-term Effects of Cognitive Training on Everyday Functional Outcomes in Older Adults
Willis, S. L., Tennstedt, S. L., Marsiske, M., Ball, K., Elias, J., Koepke, K. M., Morris, J. N., Rebok, G. W., Unverzagt, F. W., Stoddard, A. M., et al. (2006) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.296.23.2805 · Cited by 1,496
Reliability: what is it, and how is it measured?
Bruton, A., Conway, J. H., & Holgate, S. T. (2000) · Physiotherapy · doi:10.1016/s0031-9406(05)61211-4 · Cited by 763
Factors influencing the latency of simple reaction time
Woods, D. L., Wyma, J. M., Yund, E. W., Herron, T. J., & Reed, B. (2015) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2015.00131 · Cited by 336
Deary, I. J., Liewald, D., & Nissan, J. (2011) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-010-0024-1 · Cited by 328
Grimmer, M., Riener, R., Walsh, C. J., & Seyfarth, A. (2019) · Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1186/s12984-018-0458-8 · Cited by 249
Research works printed but not linked: 22
- Callisaya, M., Blizzard, L., Schmidt, M., McGinley, J., Lord, S., & Srikanth, V. (2009). A population-based study of sensorimotor factors affecting gait in older people. Age Ageing, 38(3). Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19264860. · DOI
- Chen, 2017, Cognitive decline and slower reaction time in elderly individuals with mild cognitive impairment, Psychogeriatrics, 17, 364, 10.1111/psyg.12247 · DOI
- Guerreiro, 1994, Adaptação à população portuguesa da tradução do Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), Rev. Port. Neurol., 3, 9
- Hopkins, 2000, Measures of reliability in sports medicine and science, Sports Med., 30, 1, 10.2165/00007256-200030010-00001 · DOI · Paper page
- Lord, 2003, Differing Risk Factors for Falls in Nursing Home and Intermediate-Care Residents Who Can and Cannot Stand Unaided, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 51, 1645, 10.1046/j.1532-5415.2003.51518.x · DOI
- Lord, 2018, Aging, vol. 159, 157, 10.1016/B978-0-444-63916-5.00010-0 · DOI
- Marmeleira, 2017, Physical activity and physical fitness of nursing home residents with cognitive impairment: a pilot study, Exp. Gerontol., 100, 10.1016/j.exger.2017.10.025 · DOI
- Menz, 2003, Age-related differences in walking stability, Age Ageing, 32, 137, 10.1093/ageing/32.2.137 · DOI
- Mercer, 2009, Reliability and validity of a clinical test of reaction time in older adults, J. Geriatr. Phys. Ther., 32, 103, 10.1519/00139143-200932030-00004 · DOI
- Mirelman, 2012, Executive function and falls in older adults: New findings from a five-year prospective study link fall risk to cognition, PLoS ONE, 7, 10.1371/journal.pone.0040297 · DOI
- Rebok, G. W., Ball, K., Guey, L. T., Jones, R. N., Kim, H.-Y., King, J. W., … Willis, S. L. (2014). Ten-year effects of the advanced cognitive training for independent and vital elderly cognitive training trial on cognition and everyday functioning in older adults. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc., 62(1), 16–24. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.12607. · DOI · Paper page
- Ries, J. D., Echternach, J. L., Nof, L., & Gagnon Blodgett, M. (2009). Test-retest reliability and minimal detectable change scores for the timed “up & go” test, the six-minute walk test, and gait speed in people with Alzheimer disease. Phys. Ther., 89(6), 569–579. doi:https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20080258. · DOI
- Rossi, G., Malaguti, A., & Del Rossi, S. (2014). Practice effects associated with repeated assessment of a clinical test of reaction time. J. Athl. Train., 49(3), 356–359. doi:https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6059-49.2.04. · DOI
- van Schooten, 2019, Catch the ruler: concurrent validity and test–retest reliability of the ReacStick measures of reaction time and inhibitory executive function in older people, Aging Clin. Exp. Res., 31, 1147, 10.1007/s40520-018-1050-6 · DOI · Paper page
- Šerbetar, 2015, Establishing some measures of absolute and relative reliability of a motor tests, Croatian Journal of Education, 17, 37
- Shimizu, 2018, The effect of gait speed and gait phase to the allocation of attention during dual task gait, J. Phys. Ther. Sci., 30, 419, 10.1589/jpts.30.419 · DOI
- Sturnieks, 2012, Sensorimotor and neuropsychological correlates of force perturbations that induce stepping in older adults, Gait Posture, 36, 356, 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2012.03.007 · DOI
- Terwee, 2007, Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60, 34, 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012 · DOI · Paper page
- Tun, 2008, Age differences in reaction time and attention in a National Telephone Sample of adults: education, sex, and task complexity matter, Dev. Psychol., 44, 1421, 10.1037/a0012845 · DOI
- University of Cambridge
- Wang, 2016, Evaluating the fall risk among elderly population by choice step reaction test, Clin. Interv. Aging, 11, 1075, 10.2147/CIA.S106606 · DOI
- Weir, 2005, Quantifying test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM, Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Cited by
Ferreira, S., Raimundo, A., del Pozo-Cruz, J., Leite, N., Pinto, A., & Marmeleira, J. (2024) · Aging Clinical and Experimental Research · doi:10.1007/s40520-024-02726-6 · Cited by 23
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Ferreira, S., Raimundo, A., del Pozo-Cruz, J., & Marmeleira, J.
- Venue
- Experimental Gerontology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2021-05
- Volume
- 147
- Pages
- 111271
- ISSN
- 0531-5565
- Cited by
- 14
- References
- 7
- Language
- en
- Licence
- www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
- www.elsevier.com/legal/tdmrep-license (tdm)
- doi.org/10.15223/policy-017 (stm-asf)
- doi.org/10.15223/policy-037 (stm-asf)
- doi.org/10.15223/policy-012 (stm-asf)
- doi.org/10.15223/policy-029 (stm-asf)
- doi.org/10.15223/policy-004 (stm-asf)
- Funders
- Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
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
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.