Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 728

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

An Objective Measure of Physical Function of Elderly Outpatients: The Physical Performance Test

Reuben, David B., Siu, Albert L.·1990·Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
DOI 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1990.tb01373.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Direct observation of physical function has the advantage of providing an objective, quantifiable measure of functional capabilities. We have developed the Physical Performance Test (PPT), which assesses multiple domains of physical function using observed performance of tasks that simulate activities of daily living of various degrees of difficulty. Two versions are presented: a nine‐item scale that includes writing a sentence, simulated eating, turning 360 degrees, putting on and removing a jacket, lifting a book and putting it on a shelf, picking up a penny from the floor, a 50‐foot walk test, and climbing stairs (scored as two items); and a seven‐item scale that does not include stairs. The PPT can be completed in less than 10 minutes and requires only a few simple props. We then tested the validity of PPT using 183 subjects (mean age, 79 years) in six settings including four clinical practices (one of Parkinson's disease patients), a board‐and‐care home, and a senior citizens' apartment. The PPT was reliable (Cronbach's alpha = 0.87 and 0.79, interrater reliability = 0.99 and 0.93 for the nine‐item and seven‐item tests, respectively) and demonstrated concurrent validity with self‐reported measures of physical function. Scores on the PPT for both scales were highly correlated (.50 to .80) with modified Rosow‐Breslau, Instrumental and Basic Activities of Daily Living scales, and Tinetti gait score. Scores on the PPT were more moderately correlated with self‐reported health status, cognitive status, and mental health (.24 to .47), and negatively with age (−.24 and −.18). Thus, the PPT also demonstrated construct validity. The PPT is a promising objective measurement of physical function, but its clinical and research value for screening, monitoring, and prediction will have to be determined .

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1990.tb01373.x

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 3 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Reuben, D. B., & Siu, A. L.
Venue
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1990-10
Volume
38
Issue
10
Pages
1105-1112
ISSN
  • 0002-8614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-5415
DOI
10.1111/j.1532-5415.1990.tb01373.x
OpenAlex
W1499546297
Cited by
728
References
3
FWCI
6.48
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

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.