Reliability Research: Towards a More Clinically Relevant Approach

Abstract

Background and Purpose: Articles on reliability research are published frequently in the international literature. Although clinicians often use the conclusions of such studies to decide whether or not to use a new instrument in clinical practice, we feel that most of these publications are lacking clinical relevance. To confirm this notion, we searched the literature for studies evaluating the reliability of muscle strength and active range of movement measurements. Methods: Sixty-five studies were retrieved and were scored for their design, statistical techniques, and protocol reproducibility. Results: Nearly all studies (97%) were performed under controlled 'laboratory' conditions, using a median of 2 raters and 24.5 subjects. Correlation coefficients were usually used to express the reliability of a measurement, and only 43% of the factors that could affect measurements were adequately described in the study protocols. Discussion and Conclusion: These findings support our assumption. Recommendations for future research are given.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 29 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.