Validity and reliability of a ruler drop test to measure dual-task reaction time, choice reaction time and discrimination reaction time.
Choice reaction time
Discrimination reaction time
Dual-task reaction time
Older adults
Ruler drop test
Simple reaction time
Journal
Aging clinical and experimental research
ISSN: 1720-8319
Titre abrégé: Aging Clin Exp Res
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101132995
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 Mar 2024
07 Mar 2024
Historique:
received:
26
08
2023
accepted:
16
02
2024
medline:
7
3
2024
pubmed:
7
3
2024
entrez:
7
3
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The aim of this study was to determine the absolute and relative reliability of the Ruler Drop Test (RDT) for assessing dual-task, choice, and discrimination reaction time. In addition, the construct validity of the RDT is examined in comparison to the Deary-Liewald reaction time (DLRT). Tests were administered by the same evaluator, one week apart. Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC3.1) was used to measure relative reliability, and the standard error of measurement (SEM) and minimal detectable change (MDC95) were used to measure absolute reliability. Spearman correlation test was used to measure construct validity. The results showed that the relative reliability was good for the choice ruler drop (ICC = 0.81), moderate for the dual-task ruler drop test (ICC = 0.70) and discrimination ruler drop test (ICC = 0.72), and good for simple ruler drop test. However, the simple ruler drop test had poor reliability (ICC = 0.57). The RDT shows construct validity compared to the DLRT. We conclude that the RDT is a suitable instrument for measuring dual-task, choice and discrimination reaction time. Future studies should explore the reliability of these measures in other populations.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The aim of this study was to determine the absolute and relative reliability of the Ruler Drop Test (RDT) for assessing dual-task, choice, and discrimination reaction time. In addition, the construct validity of the RDT is examined in comparison to the Deary-Liewald reaction time (DLRT).
METHODS
METHODS
Tests were administered by the same evaluator, one week apart. Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC3.1) was used to measure relative reliability, and the standard error of measurement (SEM) and minimal detectable change (MDC95) were used to measure absolute reliability. Spearman correlation test was used to measure construct validity.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The results showed that the relative reliability was good for the choice ruler drop (ICC = 0.81), moderate for the dual-task ruler drop test (ICC = 0.70) and discrimination ruler drop test (ICC = 0.72), and good for simple ruler drop test. However, the simple ruler drop test had poor reliability (ICC = 0.57). The RDT shows construct validity compared to the DLRT.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
We conclude that the RDT is a suitable instrument for measuring dual-task, choice and discrimination reaction time. Future studies should explore the reliability of these measures in other populations.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38451364
doi: 10.1007/s40520-024-02726-6
pii: 10.1007/s40520-024-02726-6
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
61Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Lord S, Delbaere K, Sturnieks D (2018) Aging. In Brian D. & Lord S (ed) Balance, Gait, and Falls. Elsevier, pp. 157–171.
Magill R, Anderson D (2017) Motor learning and control: concepts and applications. Mc Graw Hill Education, New York, pp 480.
Stebbins G. Neuropsychological Testing. In: Goetz C, (ed) Textbook of Clinical Neurology: Third Edition. Elsevier, 2007. p. 1–1364.
Salthouse T (2007) Reaction time. In: Birren J, (ed). Encyclopedia of Gerontology. Elsevier, pp 407–410
Newell K, Vaillancourt D, Sosnoff J (2006) Aging, Complexity, and Motor Performance. In: Birren J, Schaie. Handbook of The Psychology of Aging. New York, pp 163-178
Darbutas T, Juodžbalienė V, Skurvydas A, Kriščiūnas A (2013) Dependence of reaction time and movement speed on task complexity and age. Medicina 42(1): 18-22
Callisaya ML, Blizzard L, Schmidt MD, Mcginley JL, Lord SR, Srikanth VK (2009) A population-based study of sensorimotor factors affecting gait in older people. Age Ageing. 38:290–295
doi: 10.1093/ageing/afp017
pubmed: 19264860
Menz HB, Lord SR, Fitzpatrick RC (2003) Age-related differences in walking stability. Age Ageing. 32:137–142
doi: 10.1093/ageing/32.2.137
Lord SR, Murray SM, Chapman K, Munro B, Tiedemann A (2002) Sit-to-stand performance depends on sensation, speed, balance, and psychological status in addition to strength in older people. The journals of gerontology Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences. 57: 539-543.
Lord SR, Rogers MW, Howland A, Fitzpatrick R (1999) Lateral stability, sensorimotor function and falls in older people. J Am Geriatr Soc 47(9):1077–1081
doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1999.tb05230.x
pubmed: 10484249
Tiedemann AC, Sherrington C, Lord SR (2007) Physical and psychological factors associated with stair negotiation performance in older people. The journals of gerontology Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences 62(11):1259–1265
Sturnieks DL, Menant J, Vanrenterghem J, Delbaere K, Fitzpatrick RC, Lord SR (2012) Sensorimotor and neuropsychological correlates of force perturbations that induce stepping in older adults. Gait Posture 36(3):356–360
doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2012.03.007
Lundin-Olsson L, Nyberg L, Gustafson Y (1997) "Stops walking when talking" as a predictor of falls in elderly people. Lancet 349(9052):617
Nagamatsu LS, Munkacsy M, Liu-Ambrose T, Handy TC (2013) Altered visual-spatial attention to task-irrelevant information is associated with falls risk in older adults. Neuropsychologia 51(14):3025–3032
doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.10.002
Johnson BL, Nelson JK (1969) Practical measurements for evaluation in physical education. Fourth edi. Burgess Pub. Co, New York., p 477
Deary IJ, Liewald D, Nissan J (2011) A free, easy-to-use, computer-based simple and four-choice reaction time programme: the Deary-Liewald reaction time task. Behav Res Methods 43(1):258–268
doi: 10.3758/s13428-010-0024-1
Cox B, Huppert F, Whichelow M (1993) The health and lifestyle survey: seven years on. UK: Dartmouth, Aldershot
Jensen A (1987) Individual differences in the Hick paradigm. In: Vernon PA (ed) Speed of information-processing and intelligence. Ablex Publishing, pp. 101–175
Schuhfried (2013) Vienna Test System: Psychological Assessment. Schuhfried, Moedling, Austria
Sahakian BJ, Owen AM (1992) Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB): A factor analytic study of a large sample of normal elderly volunteers. Dementia 5;266-281
van Schooten KS, Duran L, Visschedijk M, Pijnappels M, Lord SR, Richardson J et al (2019) Catch the ruler: concurrent validity and test-retest reliability of the ReacStick measures of reaction time and inhibitory executive function in older people. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research 31(8):1147–1154
Ferreira S, Raimundo A, del Pozo-Cruz J, Marmeleira J (2021) Psychometric properties of a computerized and hand-reaction time tests in older adults using long-term facilities with and without mild cognitive impairment. Experimental gerontology 147.
Guerreiro M, Silva A, Botelho M, Leitão O, Castro-Caldas A, Garcia C (1994) Adaptação à população Portuguesa Da tradução do Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) – ScienceOpen. Rev Port Neurol 3(suppl):9–10
Del Rossi G, Malaguti A, Del Rossi S (2014) Practice effects associated with repeated assessment of a clinical test of reaction time. J Athl Train 49(3):356–359
doi: 10.4085/1062-6059-49.2.04
pubmed: 24673236
pmcid: 4080596
Weir JP (2005) Quantifying test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. J Strength Conditioning Res 19(1):231–240
Koo TK, Li MY (2016) A Guideline of selecting and reporting Intraclass correlation coefficients for Reliability Research. J Chiropr Med 15(2):155
Portney LG, Watkins MP (2015) Foundations of clinical research: applications to practice. FA Davis
Bruton A, Conway JH, Holgate ST (2000) Reliability: What is it, and how is it measured?. Physiotherapy 86(2):94–9
Šerbetar I (2015) Establishing Some Measures of Absolute and Relative Reliability of a Motor Tests. Croatian Journal of Education 17: 37-48
Hopkins WG (2000) Measures of reliability in sports medicine and science. Sports Med 30(1):1–15
Ries JD, Echternach JL, Nof L, Blodgett MG (2009) Test-retest reliability and minimal detectable change scores for the timed Up & Go Test, the six-Minute Walk Test, and Gait Speed in People with Alzheimer Disease. Phys Therapy 89(6):569–579
doi: 10.2522/ptj.20080258
Terwee CB, Bot SDM, de Boer MR, van der Windt DAWM, Knol DL, Dekker J et al (2007) Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 60(1):34–42
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012
Johnson BL, Nelson JK (1986) Practical measurements for evaluation in Physical Education. Fourth edi. Macmillan, New York