Cited by 15

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Comparing Computer-Derived and Human-Observed Scores for the Balance Error Scoring System

Caccese, Jaclyn B., Kaminski, Thomas W.·2016·Journal of Sport Rehabilitation

Abstract

Context: The Balance Error Scoring System (BESS) is the current standard for assessing postural stability in concussed athletes on the sideline. However, research has questioned the objectivity and validity of the BESS, suggesting that while certain subcategories of the BESS have sufficient reliability to be used in evaluation of postural stability, the total score is not reliable, demonstrating limited interrater and intrarater reliability. Recently, a computerized BESS test was developed to automate scoring. Objective: To compare computerderived BESS scores with those taken from 3 trained human scorers. Design: Interrater reliability study. Setting: Athletic training room. Patients: NCAA Division I student athletes (53 male, 58 female; 19 ± 2 y, 168 ± 41 cm, 69 ± 4 kg). Interventions: Subjects were asked to perform the BESS while standing on the Tekscan (Boston, MA) MobileMat® BESS. The MobileMat BESS software displayed an error score at the end of each trial. Simultaneously, errors were recorded by 3 separate examiners. Errors were counted using the standard BESS scoring criteria. Main Outcome Measures: The number of BESS errors was computed for the 6 stances from the software and each of the 3 human scorers. Interclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to compare errors for each stance scored by the MobileMat BESS software with each of 3 raters individually. The ICC values were converted to Fisher Z scores, averaged, and converted back into ICC values. Results: The double-leg, single-leg, and tandem-firm stances resulted in good agreement with human scorers (ICC = .999, .731, and .648). All foam stances resulted in fair agreement. Conclusions: Our results suggest that the MobileMat BESS is suitable for identifying BESS errors involving each of the 6 stances of the BESS protocol. Because the MobileMat BESS scores consistently and reliably, this system can be used with confidence by clinicians as an effective alternative to scoring the BESS.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1123/jsr.2014-0281

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Caccese, J. B., & Kaminski, T. W.
Venue
Journal of Sport Rehabilitation
Published
2016-05
Volume
25
Issue
2
Pages
133-136
ISSN
  • 1056-6716
  • 1543-3072
Cited by
15
References
0

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