Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 20, 2026
A Novel Single Animal Motor Function Tracking System Using Simple, Readily Available Software
Published on: August 31, 2018
A study of whether video scoring is a reliable option for blinded scoring of the Gross Motor Function Measure-88
Inge Franki1, Chris Van den Broeck2, Josse De Cat3
1Department of Rehabilitation Sciences and Physiotherapy, Ghent University, Belgium Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, KU-Leuven, Leuven, Belgium inge.franki@ugent.be.
Objective:
To investigate the agreement between live and video scores of the Gross Motor Function Measure-88.
Design:
Reliability study.
Subjects:
Forty children with bilateral spastic cerebral palsy.
Interventions:
Fifty evaluations were administered according to the test guidelines, and were videotaped. After a minimum interval of one month, the video recordings were again rated by the same assessor. Two physical therapy students also each scored the recordings twice, with a minimal interval of one month.
Main Measures:
Agreement between live and video scores as well as inter-rater and intra-rater agreement of the video scores were assessed using intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC), standard error of measurements (SEM), and smallest detectable changes (SDC). Weighted kappa coefficients were used to analyse individual items.
Results:
The live and video scores from the same assessor showed good to very good agreement for the total score (ICC, 0.973; SEM, 2.28; SDC, 6.32) and dimensions B (ICC, 0.938), D (ICC, 0.965), and E (ICC, 0.992) but lower agreement for A (ICC, 0.720) and C (ICC, 0.667). Live-versus-video agreement for the total score was higher than inter-rater agreement by video (ICC, 0.949; SEM, 3.15; SDC, 8.73) but lower than intra-rater agreement by video (ICC, 0.989; SEM, 1.42; SDC, 3.96).
Conclusion:
The Gross Motor Function Measure-88 can be reliably scored using video recordings. The agreement between live and video scores is lower than the intra-rater reliability using video recordings only. Future clinical trial results should be interpreted using the appropriate SEM and SDC values.
