A comparison of computerized adaptive testing and fixed-length short forms for the Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility (PLUS-MTM).
Dagmar Amtmann, Alyssa M Bamer, Jiseon Kim and 5 others
PMID 28866959WHAT IT FOUND
For adults using a prosthetic leg, the adaptive PLUS-M gave usable mobility scores after 5 items on average and took 68.9 seconds.
The 7-item form took 82.9 seconds, and the 12-item form took 124.5 seconds. Fixed forms produced similar scores.
Key findings
01The adaptive PLUS-M took 68.9 seconds to administer and score, while the electronic 12-item short form took 124.5 seconds and the electronic 7-item short form took 82.9 seconds.
02The adaptive PLUS-M met the study's precision cutoff for 97% of scores, the 12-item short form for 92%, and the 7-item short form for 70%.
03Scores from the adaptive PLUS-M and both short forms were very similar, with average score differences never exceeding 0.5 on a scale where the usual spread is 10 points.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Convenience samples were used, so the results may not represent all people with lower-limb amputation. Paper short-form completion times were measured during phone calls, and participants may have read the survey beforehand, which could underestimate completion time. The adaptive software could not adjust stopping rules, so some people with very low or very high mobility answered the maximum 12 items. Most survey platforms do not currently support adaptive administration, which limits real-world use.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflict of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that the adaptive PLUS-M is necessary for every mobility assessment. It was faster and more precise at very high mobility, but the fixed short forms produced similar scores and remain practical alternatives.