The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Validation of a Standardized Assessment of Postural Control in Stroke Patients: The Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke Patients (PASS)
Abstract
Background and Purpose —Few clinical tools available for assessment of postural abilities are specifically designed for stroke patients. Most have major floor or ceiling effects, and their metrological properties are not always completely known. Methods —The Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke patients (PASS), adapted from the BL Motor Assessment, was elaborated in concordance with 3 main ideas: (1) the ability to maintain a given posture and to ensure equilibrium in changing position both must be assessed; (2) the scale should be applicable for all patients, even those with very poor postural performance; and (3) it should contain items with increasing difficulty. This new scale has been validated in 70 patients tested on the 30th and 90th days after stroke onset. Results —Normative data obtained in 30 age-matched healthy subjects are presented. The PASS meets the following requirements: (1) good construct validity: high correlation with concomitant Functional Independence Measure (FIM) scores ( r =0.73, P =10 −6 ), with lower-limb motricity scores ( r =0.78, P <10 −6 ), and with an instrumental measure of postural stabilization ( r =0.48, P <10 −2 ); (2) excellent predictive validity: high correlation between PASS scores on the 30th day and FIM scores on the 90th day ( r =0.75, P <10 −6 ); (3) high internal consistency (Cronbach α-coefficient=0.95); and (4) high interrater and test-retest reliabilities (average κ=0.88 and 0.72). Conclusions —Our results confirm that the PASS is one of the most valid and reliable clinical assessments of postural control in stroke patients during the first 3 months after stroke.
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
Cites
Massion, J. (1994) · Current Opinion in Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/0959-4388(94)90137-6 · Cited by 747
Cited by
Usefulness of the Berg Balance Scale in Stroke Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review
Blum, L., & Korner-Bitensky, N. (2008) · Physical Therapy · doi:10.2522/ptj.20070205 · Cited by 1,207
Assessing Wolf Motor Function Test as Outcome Measure for Research in Patients After Stroke
Wolf, S. L., Catlin, P. A., Ellis, M., Archer, A. L., Morgan, B., & Piacentino, A. (2001) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/01.str.32.7.1635 · Cited by 1,051
Perception of Verticality After Recent Cerebral Hemispheric Stroke
Yelnik, A. P., Lebreton, F. O., Bonan, I. V., Colle, F. M. C., Meurin, F. A., Guichard, J. P., & Vicaut, E. (2002) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/01.str.0000027212.26686.48 · Cited by 161
Hsu, Y.-C., Wang, H., Zhao, Y., Chen, F., & Tsui, K.-L. (2021) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/30135 · Cited by 9
Metadata
- Authors
- Benaim, C., Pérennou, D. A., Villy, J., Rousseaux, M., & Pelissier, J. Y.
- Venue
- Stroke
- Published
- 1999-09
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1862-1868
- ISSN
- 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
- 1524-4628
- OpenAlex
- W2122034863
- Cited by
- 410
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 3.59
- 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: Validation of a Standardized Assessment of Postural Control in Stroke Patients: The Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke Patients (PASS). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.str.30.9.1862
- The paper
- Benaim, C., Pérennou, D. A., Villy, J., Rousseaux, M., & Pelissier, J. Y. (1999). Validation of a Standardized Assessment of Postural Control in Stroke Patients: The Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke Patients (PASS). Stroke. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.str.30.9.1862
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.