Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Exploring disability rating scale responsiveness II: do more response options help?

S J Cano1, R J O'Connor, A J Thompson

  • 1Neurological Outcomes Measures Unit, Institute of Neurology, University College London, United Kingdom.

Neurology
|December 13, 2006
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Anti-HBs Immune Complex Levels: A Novel Marker of Hepatitis Flare Following Nucleos(t)ide Analog Withdrawal in HBeAg-negative Chronic Hepatitis B.

The Journal of infectious diseases·2025
Same author

Balancing Efficiency and Accuracy in Hepatitis C Rapid Antibody Testing: Insights From a Cluster Randomised Crossover Trial.

Journal of viral hepatitis·2025
Same author

Editorial: Ultralow HBsAg Levels and the Prediction of Cure in Chronic Hepatitis B.

Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics·2025
Same author

New insights into the effects of ethylene on ABA catabolism, sweetening and dormancy in stored potato tubers.

Postharvest biology and technology·2021
Same author

Direct Measurement of Single-Molecule Ligand-Receptor Interactions.

The journal of physical chemistry. B·2020
Same author

Prevalence of baseline HCV NS5A resistance associated substitutions in genotype 1a, 1b and 3 infection in Australia.

Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology·2019
Same journal

Factors Associated With Disability Improvement and Worsening Independent of Attacks in Patients With AQP4-IgG+ NMOSD and MOGAD: A Multicenter Cohort Study.

Neurology·2026
Same journal

Cost-Effectiveness of Intracranial Aneurysm Screening: A Systematic Review.

Neurology·2026
Same journal

Rare Eating Epilepsy: Co-Occurrence of Focal Cortical Dysplasia and Gray Matter Heterotopia.

Neurology·2026
Same journal

Spatiotemporal Associations Between Cortical Microinfarcts and Cortical Superficial Siderosis in Cerebral Amyloid Angiopathy.

Neurology·2026
Same journal

Blood-Brain Barrier Disruption Before Interhospital Transfer for Thrombectomy and Clinical Outcome.

Neurology·2026
Same journal

At Death's Door: Cytosolic Dopamine in Patients With Parkinson Disease.

Neurology·2026
See all related articles

The Functional Independence Measure (FIM) offers greater potential for measuring disability change than the Barthel Index (BI). However, both scales demonstrated similar actual responsiveness in this study.

Area of Science:

  • Rehabilitation Medicine
  • Clinical Measurement
  • Disability Assessment

Background:

  • The Barthel Index (BI) is a common scale for assessing disability.
  • Limited response options in the BI may hinder accurate measurement of change.
  • The Functional Independence Measure (FIM) offers a more granular assessment.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the responsiveness of the FIM to the BI in measuring disability change.
  • To investigate if a scale with more response options is more sensitive to change.

Main Methods:

  • A comparative study involving 1,396 participants.
  • Assessed disability using both the Barthel Index (BI) and the Functional Independence Measure (FIM).
  • Calculated effect sizes to measure responsiveness.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • The FIM demonstrated a higher theoretical potential for responsiveness.
  • The FIM identified a greater number of individuals who experienced change.
  • Despite theoretical advantages, the FIM's measured responsiveness (effect size) was equivalent to the BI's.

Conclusions:

  • Effect sizes may not fully capture the responsiveness of disability scales.
  • The choice of scale and its response options impacts the potential for detecting change.
  • Further research is needed to refine methods for assessing responsiveness in disability measures.