Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 485

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Analysis and Comparison of the Psychometric Properties of Three Balance Measures for Stroke Patients

Mao, Hui-Fen, Hsueh, I-Ping, Tang, Pei-Fang, Sheu, Ching-Fan, Hsieh, Ching-Lin·2002·Stroke

Abstract

Background and Purpose—This study compared the psychometric properties of 3 clinical balance measures, the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), the Balance subscale of the Fugl-Meyer test (FM-B), and the Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke Patients (PASS), in stroke patients with a broad range of neurological and functional impairment from the acute stage up to 180 days after onset. Methods—One hundred twenty-three stroke patients were followed up prospectively with the 3 balance measures 14, 30, 90, and 180 days after stroke onset (DAS). Reliability (interrater reliability and internal consistency) and validity (concurrent validity, convergent validity, and predictive validity) of each measure were examined. A comparison of the responsiveness of each of the 3 measures was made on the basis of the entire group of patients and 3 separate groups classified by degree of neurological severity. Results—The FM-B and BBS showed a significant floor or ceiling effect at some DAS points, whereas the PASS did not show these effects. The BBS, FM-B, and PASS all had good reliability and validity for patients at different recovery stages after stroke. The results of effect size demonstrated fair to good responsiveness of all 3 measures within the first 90 DAS but, as expected, only a low level of responsiveness at 90 to 180 DAS. The PASS was more responsive to changes in severe stroke patients at the earliest period after stroke onset, 14 to 30 DAS. Conclusions—All 3 measures tested showed very acceptable levels of reliability, validity, and responsiveness for both clinicians and researchers. The PASS showed slightly better psychometric characteristics than the other 2 measures.

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 · 10.1161/01.str.0000012516.63191.c5

Cites

31 of 31 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 31 references

Cited by

See all 485

Metadata

Authors
Mao, H.-F., Hsueh, I.-P., Tang, P.-F., Sheu, C.-F., & Hsieh, C.-L.
Venue
Stroke
Published
2002-04
Volume
33
Issue
4
Pages
1022-1027
ISSN
  • 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4628
OpenAlex
W2074573291
Cited by
485
References
31
FWCI
10.07
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: Analysis and Comparison of the Psychometric Properties of Three Balance Measures for Stroke Patients. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.str.0000012516.63191.c5
The paper
Mao, H.-F., Hsueh, I.-P., Tang, P.-F., Sheu, C.-F., & Hsieh, C.-L. (2002). Analysis and Comparison of the Psychometric Properties of Three Balance Measures for Stroke Patients. Stroke. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.str.0000012516.63191.c5

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.