Cited by 1,081Balance, Gait, and Falls PreventionPsychometric Methodologies and TestingStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery

Using psychometric techniques to improve the Balance Evaluation Systems Test: the mini-BESTest

Open access
Franchignoni, F, Horak, F, Godi, M, Nardone, A, Giordano, A·2010·Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To improve, with the aid of psychometric analysis, the Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest), a tool designed to analyse several postural control systems that may contribute to poor functional balance in adults. METHODS: Performance of the BESTest was examined in a convenience sample of 115 consecutive adult patients with diverse neurological diagnoses and disease severity, referred to rehabilitation for balance disorders. Factor (both explorative and confirmatory) and Rasch analysis were used to process the data in order to produce a new, reduced and coherent balance measurement tool. RESULTS: Factor analysis selected 24 out of the 36 original BESTest items likely to represent the unidimensional construct of "dynamic balance". Rasch analysis was then used to: (i) improve the rating categories, and (ii) delete 10 items (misfitting or showing local dependency). The model consisting of the remaining 14 tasks was verified with confirmatory factor analysis to meet the stringent requirements of modern measurement. CONCLUSION: The new 14-item scale (dubbed mini-BESTest) focuses on dynamic balance, can be conducted in 10-15 min, and contains items belonging evenly to 4 of the 6 sections from the original BESTest. Further studies are needed to confirm the usefulness of the mini-BESTest in clinical settings.

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 · 10.2340/16501977-0537

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • The BESTest and miniBESTest were developed to differentiate the six postural control elements of the systems control approach.

    “the recently described Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) 27 or the miniBESTest, 78 which were developed to differentiate the six postural control elements of the systems control approach.”

    From Exercise interventions improve postural control in children with cerebral palsy: a systematic review (2015) · cites this paper as [78]

    The Discussion says the original BESTest was developed to analyse six postural control systems. It says the mini-BESTest instead measures dynamic balance and draws items from four of the original six sections, so the six-element purpose does not apply to both tests. (LLM, conf=0.91)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Franchignoni, F., Horak, F., Godi, M., Nardone, A., & Giordano, A.
Affiliations
  • Fondazione Salvatore Maugeri (IT)
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
  • Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale “Amedeo Avogadro” (IT)
Venue
Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine
Published
2010
Volume
42
Issue
4
Pages
323-331
ISSN
1650-1977 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2156121997
Cited by
1,081
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 86 · 2025: 112 · 2024: 109 · 2023: 95 · 2022: 97 · 2021: 114 · 2020: 93 · 2019: 82 · 2018: 55 · 2017: 51 · 2016: 46 · 2015: 37 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 29 · 2012: 27
FWCI
58.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r37ag006457-28)
  • National Institute on Aging (R37-AG006457, R01AG006457, AG 06457)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Keywords
Balance Evaluation Systems Test, Mini-BESTest, dynamic balance, postural control, balance disorders, neurorehabilitation, psychometric validation, Rasch analysis, factor analysis, item reduction, local dependence
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Postural Balance, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychometrics, Vestibular Diseases, Gait Disorders, Neurologic

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