• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Pediatrics >Inter-tester reproducibility and inter-method agreement of two variations of the Beighton test for determining Generalised Joint Hypermobility in primary school children
【24h】

Inter-tester reproducibility and inter-method agreement of two variations of the Beighton test for determining Generalised Joint Hypermobility in primary school children

机译：测试人员之间的可重复性和方法间一致性，用于确定小学生广义关节过度活动的Beighton测试的两种变体

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Background The assessment of Generalised Joint Hypermobility (GJH) is usually based on the Beighton tests, which consist of a series of nine tests. Possible methodological shortcomings can arise, as the tests do not include detailed descriptions of performance, interpretation nor classification of GJH. The purpose of this study was, among children aged 7-8 and 10-12?years, to evaluate: 1) the inter-tester reproducibility of the tests and criteria for classification of GJH for 2 variations of the Beighton test battery (Methods A and B) with a variation in starting positions and benchmarks between methods, and 2) the inter-method agreement for the two batteries. Methods A standardised three-phase protocol for clinical reproducibility studies was followed including a training phase, an overall agreement phase and a study phase. The number of participants in the three phases was 10, 70 and 39 respectively. For the inter-method study a total of 103 children participated. Two testers judged each test battery. A score of ≥5 was set as the cut-off level for GJH. Cohen's kappa statistics and McNemar′s test were used to test for agreement and significant differences. Results Kappa values for GJH (≥5) were 0.64 (Method A, prevalence 0.42) and 0.59 (Method B, prevalence 0.46), with no difference between testers in Method A (p?=?0.45) and B (p?=?0.29). Prevalence of GJH in the inter-method study was 31% (A) and 35% (B) with no difference between methods (p?=?0.54). Conclusions Inter-tester reproducibility of Methods A and B was moderate to substantial, when following a standardised study protocol. Both test batteries can be used in the same children population, as there was no difference in prevalence of GJH at cut point 5, when applying method A and B. However, both methods need to be tested for their predictive validity at higher cut-off levels, e.g. ≥6 and ≥7.
机译：背景技术广义关节过度运动（GJH）的评估通常基于Beighton测试，该测试由一系列的9个测试组成。由于测试未包括GJH的性能，解释或分类的详细说明，因此可能出现方法上的缺陷。这项研究的目的是在7-8岁和10-12岁的儿童中评估：1）Beighton测试电池的2种变化的测试和GJH分类标准的测试间再现性（方法A B）方法之间的起始位置和基准有所不同，以及2）两个电池的方法间协议。方法遵循临床可重复性研究的标准化三个阶段方案，包括培训阶段，总体协议阶段和研究阶段。三个阶段的参与者人数分别为10、70和39。为进行跨方法研究，共有103名儿童参加。每个测试电池由两名测试人员评判。 GJH的截止水平设为≥5。使用科恩（Cohen）的卡伯（Kappa）统计量和麦克尼马尔（McNemar）的检验来检验一致性和显着性差异。结果GJH（≥5）的Kappa值分别为0.64（方法A，患病率0.42）和0.59（方法B，患病率0.46），方法A（p？=？0.45）和B（p？=？）的测试者之间没有差异。 0.29）。在方法间研究中，GJH的患病率分别为31％（A）和35％（B），两种方法之间无差异（p？=？0.54）。结论当遵循标准化的研究方案时，方法A和方法B的测试者之间的可重复性中等到充分。两种测试电池均可用于同一儿童群体，因为使用方法A和方法B时，切割点5的GJH患病率没有差异。但是，两种方法都需要在更高的临界值下测试其预测有效性级别，例如≥6和≥7。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号