| MEASUREMENT PROPERTIES | |
| Limitations | >=5 European languages (English) |
| Observations | |
| 1. RELIABILITY | |
| A. Internal Consistency | Tested |
| Cronbach's (Describe) |
The ULFI has high internal consistency (Cronbach’s α= 0.89) |
| B. Reliability intraobserver or test-retest | Tested |
| Continuous scores: intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) Dichotomus: Cohen kappa (Describe) |
ICC= 0.96 |
| C. Reliability interobserver or Measurement error | Tested |
| Standard error of measurement (SEM), smallest detectable change (SDC) or Limits of agreement (LoA) (Describe) |
SEM = 4.5 % (1.13 ULFI points) |
| 2. VALIDITY | |
| A. Content validity: face validity | Tested |
| Expert opinion (relevance and comprehensiveness) (Describe) |
The ULFI demonstrated an impairment range of 0–100%, with no missing responses and a combined patient completion and therapist scoring time of less than 3 minutes. |
| B. Construct Validity: Structural validity |
Tested |
| Hypotheses-testing | Tested |
| Cross-cultural validity | Tested |
| Brief Description |
Distribution analysis was demonstrated as relatively normal with limited or no ‘‘ceiling’’ or ‘‘floor’’ effect found for either the ULFI or the DASH. The UEFS did not demonstrate this normal or Gaussian distribution capacity. Further analysis of distribution in the areas of proximal versus distal, general, and then central components of the limb indicates a normalized distribution tendency for the ULFI and the DASH, but again not for the UEFS. |
| C. Criterion validity | Tested |
| Comparison with a 'gold standard' Continuous scores: correlations, ROC curves Dichotomus: Sensitivity & Specificity (Describe) |
There was high correlation between the ULFI and DASH with a Pearson’s coefficient of 0.87 and UEFS (r = 0.78) |