A Reliability test system for educational purposes-basic data

The IEEE Subcommittee on the Application of Probability Methods (APM) published the IEEE Reliability Test System (RTS) [1] in 1979. This system provides a consistent and generally acceptable set of data that can be used both in generation capacity and in composite system reliability evaluation [2,3]. The test system provides a basis for the comparison of results obtained by different people using different methods. Prior to its publication, there was no general agreement on either the system or the data that should be used to demonstrate or test various techniques developed to conduct reliability studies. Development of reliability assessment techniques and programs are very dependent on the intent behind the development as the experience of one power utility with their system may be quite different from that of another utility. The development and the utilization of a reliability program are, therefore, greatly influenced by the experience of a utlity and the intent of the system manager, planner and designer conducting the reliability studies. The IEEE-RTS has proved to be extremely valuable in highlighting and comparing the capabilities (or incapabilities) of programs used in reliability studies, the differences in the perception of various power utilities and the differences in the solution techniques. The IEEE-RTS contains a reasonably large power network which can be difficult to use for initial studies in an educational environment.

A Reliability test system for educational purposes-basic data

The IEEE Reliability Test System (RTS) developed by the Application of Probability Method Subcommittee has been used to compare and test a wide range of generating capacity and composite system evaluation techniques and subsequent digital computer programs. A basic reliability test system is presented which has evolved from the reliability education and research programs conducted by the Power System Research Group at the University of Saskatchewan. The basic system data necessary for adequacy evaluation at the generation and composite generation and transmission system levels are presented together with the fundamental data required to conduct reliability-cost/reliability-worth evaluation

A Reliability test system for educational purposes-basic results

A set of basic reliability indices at the generation and composite generation and transmission levels for a small reliability test system are presented. The test system and the results presented have evolved from reliability research and teaching programs. The indices presented are for fundamental reliability applications which should be covered in a power system reliability teaching program. The RBTS test system and the basic indices provide a valuable reference for faculty and students engaged in reliability teaching and research

Timed Up and Go Tests in cardiac rehabilitation : reliability and comparison with the 6-minute walk test

PURPOSE: To test the reliability of Timed Up and Go Tests (TUGTs) in cardiac rehabilitation (CR) and compare TUGTs to the 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT) for outcome measurement. METHODS: Sixty-one of 154 consecutive community-based CR patients were prospectively recruited. Subjects undertook repeated TUGTs and 6MWTs at the start of CR (start-CR), postdischarge from CR (post-CR), and 6 months postdischarge from CR (6 months post-CR). The main outcome measurements were TUGT time (TUGTT) and 6MWT distance (6MWD). RESULTS: Mean (SD) TUGTT1 and TUGTT2 at the 3 assessments were 6.29 (1.30) and 5.94 (1.20); 5.81 (1.22) and 5.53 (1.09); and 5.39 (1.60) and 5.01 (1.28) seconds, respectively. A reduction in TUGTT occurred between each outcome point (P ≤ .002). Repeated TUGTTs were strongly correlated at each assessment, intraclass correlation (95% CI) = 0.85 (0.76–0.91), 0.84 (0.73–0.91), and 0.90 (0.83–0.94), despite a reduction between TUGTT1 and TUGTT2 of 5%, 5%, and 7%, respectively (P ≤ .006). Relative decreases in TUGTT1 (TUGTT2) occurred from start-CR to post-CR and from start-CR to 6 months post-CR of −7.5% (−6.9%) and −14.2% (−15.5%), respectively, while relative increases in 6MWD1 (6MWD2) occurred, 5.1% (7.2%) and 8.4% (10.2%), respectively (P < .001 in all cases). Pearson correlation coefficients for 6MWD1 to TUGTT1 and TUGTT2 across all times were −0.60 and −0.68 (P < .001) and the intraclass correlations (95% CI) for the speeds derived from averaged 6MWDs and TUGTTs were 0.65 (0.54, 0.73) (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Similar relative changes occurred for the TUGT and the 6MWT in CR. A significant correlation between the TUGTT and 6MWD was demonstrated, and we suggest that the TUGT may provide a related or a supplementary measurement of functional capacity in CR.

Test-retest reliability of four physical activity measures used in population surveys

Accurate monitoring of prevalence and trends in population levels of physical activity (PA) is a fundamental public health need. Test-retest reliability (repeatability) was assessed in population samples for four self-report PA measures: the Active Australia survey (AA, N=356), the short International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ, N=104), the physical activity items in the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS, N=127) and in the Australian National Health Survey (NHS, N=122). Percent agreement and Kappa statistics were used to assess reliability of classification of activity status as 'active', 'insufficiently active' or 'sedentary'. Intraclass correlations (ICCs) were used to assess agreement on minutes of activity reported for each item of each survey and for total minutes. Percent agreement scores for activity status were very good on all four instruments, ranging from 60% for the NHS to 79% for the IPAQ. Corresponding Kappa statistics ranged from 0.40 (NHS) to 0.52 (AA). For individual items, ICCs were highest for walking (0.45 to 0.78) and vigorous activity (0.22 to 0.64) and lowest for the moderate questions (0.16 to 0.44). All four measures provide acceptable levels of test-retest reliability for assessing both activity status and sedentariness, and moderate reliability for assessing total minutes of activity.

Test-retest reliability of physical activity measures used in Australian population surveys

PURPOSE Accurate monitoring of prevalence and trends in population levels of physical activity is fundamental to the planning of health promotion and disease-prevention strategies. Test-retest reliability (repeatability) was assessed for four self-report measures of physical activity commonly used in population surveys: the Active Australia survey (AA, N=356), the short form of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ-S, N=104), the physical activity items in the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS, N=127) and the physical activity items in the Australian National Health Survey (NHS, N=122). METHODS Percent agreement and Kappa statistics were used to assess the reliability of classification of activity status (where ‘active’= 150 minutes of activity per week) and sedentariness (where ‘sedentary’ = reporting no physical activity). Intraclass correlations (ICCs) were used to assess agreement on minutes of activity reported for each item of each survey and on total minutes reported in each survey. RESULTS Percent agreement scores for both activity status and sedentariness were very good on all four instruments. Overall the percent agreement between repeated surveys was between 73% (NHS) and 87% (IPAQ) for the criterion measure of achieving 150 minutes per week, and between 77% (NHS) and 89% (IPAQ) for the criterion of being sedentary. Corresponding Kappa statistics ranged from 0.46 (NHS) to 0.61 (AA) for activity status and from 0.20 (BRFSS) to 0.52 (AA) for sedentariness. For the individual items ICCs were highest for walking (0.45 to 0.56) and vigorous activity (0.22 to 0.64) and lowest for the moderate questions (0.16 to 0.44). CONCLUSION All four measures provide acceptable levels of test-retest reliability for assessing both activity status and sedentariness, and moderate reliability for assessing total minutes of activity. Supported by the Australian Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing.

Reliability in the Parameterization of the Functional Reach Test in Elderly Stroke Patients: A Pilot Study

BACKGROUND: Postural instability is one of the major complications found in stroke survivors. Parameterising the functional reach test (FRT) could be useful in clinical practice and basic research. OBJECTIVES: To analyse the reliability, sensitivity, and specificity in the FRT parameterisation using inertial sensors for recording kinematic variables in patients who have suffered a stroke. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. While performing FRT, two inertial sensors were placed on the patient's back (lumbar and trunk). PARTICIPANTS: Five subjects over 65 who suffer from a stroke. MEASUREMENTS: FRT measures, lumbosacral/thoracic maximum angular displacement, maximum time of lumbosacral/thoracic angular displacement, time return initial position, and total time. Speed and acceleration of the movements were calculated indirectly. RESULTS: FRT measure is  12.75±2.06 cm. Intrasubject reliability values range from 0.829 (time to return initial position (lumbar sensor)) to 0.891 (lumbosacral maximum angular displacement). Intersubject reliability values range from 0.821 (time to return initial position (lumbar sensor)) to 0.883 (lumbosacral maximum angular displacement). FRT's reliability was 0.987 (0.983-0.992) and 0.983 (0.979-0.989) intersubject and intrasubject, respectively. CONCLUSION: The main conclusion could be that the inertial sensors are a tool with excellent reliability and validity in the parameterization of the FRT in people who have had a stroke.

Reliability and criterion-related validity with a smartphone used in timed-up-and-go test

Background The capacity to diagnosys, quantify and evaluate movement beyond the general confines of a clinical environment under effectiveness conditions may alleviate rampant strain on limited, expensive and highly specialized medical resources. An iPhone 4® mounted a three dimensional accelerometer subsystem with highly robust software applications. The present study aimed to evaluate the reliability and concurrent criterion-related validity of the accelerations with an iPhone 4® in an Extended Timed Get Up and Go test. Extended Timed Get Up and Go is a clinical test with that the patient get up from the chair and walking ten meters, turn and coming back to the chair. Methods A repeated measure, cross-sectional, analytical study. Test-retest reliability of the kinematic measurements of the iPhone 4® compared with a standard validated laboratory device. We calculated the Coefficient of Multiple Correlation between the two sensors acceleration signal of each subject, in each sub-stage, in each of the three Extended Timed Get Up and Go test trials. To investigate statistical agreement between the two sensors we used the Bland-Altman method. Results With respect to the analysis of the correlation data in the present work, the Coefficient of Multiple Correlation of the five subjects in their triplicated trials were as follows: in sub-phase Sit to Stand the ranged between r = 0.991 to 0.842; in Gait Go, r = 0.967 to 0.852; in Turn, 0.979 to 0.798; in Gait Come, 0.964 to 0.887; and in Turn to Stand to Sit, 0.992 to 0.877. All the correlations between the sensors were significant (p < 0.001). The Bland-Altman plots obtained showed a solid tendency to stay at close to zero, especially on the y and x-axes, during the five phases of the Extended Timed Get Up and Go test. Conclusions The inertial sensor mounted in the iPhone 4® is sufficiently reliable and accurate to evaluate and identify the kinematic patterns in an Extended Timed Get and Go test. While analysis and interpretation of 3D kinematics data continue to be dauntingly complex, the iPhone 4® makes the task of acquiring the data relatively inexpensive and easy to use.

Parameterization and reliability of single-leg balance test assessed with inertial sensors in stroke survivors: a cross-sectional study

Background and purpose There are no published studies on the parameterisation and reliability of the single-leg stance (SLS) test with inertial sensors in stroke patients. Purpose: to analyse the reliability (intra-observer/inter-observer) and sensitivity of inertial sensors used for the SLS test in stroke patients. Secondary objective: to compare the records of the two inertial sensors (trunk and lumbar) to detect any significant differences in the kinematic data obtained in the SLS test. Methods Design: cross-sectional study. While performing the SLS test, two inertial sensors were placed at lumbar (L5-S1) and trunk regions (T7–T8). Setting: Laboratory of Biomechanics (Health Science Faculty - University of Málaga). Participants: Four chronic stroke survivors (over 65 yrs old). Measurement: displacement and velocity, Rotation (X-axis), Flexion/Extension (Y-axis), Inclination (Z-axis); Resultant displacement and velocity (V): RV=(Vx2+Vy2+Vz2)−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−√ Along with SLS kinematic variables, descriptive analyses, differences between sensors locations and intra-observer and inter-observer reliability were also calculated. Results Differences between the sensors were significant only for left inclination velocity (p = 0.036) and extension displacement in the non-affected leg with eyes open (p = 0.038). Intra-observer reliability of the trunk sensor ranged from 0.889-0.921 for the displacement and 0.849-0.892 for velocity. Intra-observer reliability of the lumbar sensor was between 0.896-0.949 for the displacement and 0.873-0.894 for velocity. Inter-observer reliability of the trunk sensor was between 0.878-0.917 for the displacement and 0.847-0.884 for velocity. Inter-observer reliability of the lumbar sensor ranged from 0.870-0.940 for the displacement and 0.863-0.884 for velocity. Conclusion There were no significant differences between the kinematic records made by an inertial sensor during the development of the SLS testing between two inertial sensors placed in the lumbar and thoracic regions. In addition, inertial sensors. Have the potential to be reliable, valid and sensitive instruments for kinematic measurements during SLS testing but further research is needed.

Test-retest reliability of graph theory measures of structural brain connectivity

The human connectome has recently become a popular research topic in neuroscience, and many new algorithms have been applied to analyze brain networks. In particular, network topology measures from graph theory have been adapted to analyze network efficiency and 'small-world' properties. While there has been a surge in the number of papers examining connectivity through graph theory, questions remain about its test-retest reliability (TRT). In particular, the reproducibility of structural connectivity measures has not been assessed. We examined the TRT of global connectivity measures generated from graph theory analyses of 17 young adults who underwent two high-angular resolution diffusion (HARDI) scans approximately 3 months apart. Of the measures assessed, modularity had the highest TRT, and it was stable across a range of sparsities (a thresholding parameter used to define which network edges are retained). These reliability measures underline the need to develop network descriptors that are robust to acquisition parameters.

Validation and reliability of a Spanish version of Simple Shoulder Test (SST-Sp)

Background: The Simple Shoulder Test (SST-Sp) is a widely used outcome measure. Objective: The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a Spanish-version SST (SST-Sp). Methods: A two-stage observational study was conducted. The SST was initially cross-culturally adapted to Spanish through double forward and backward translation and then validated for its psychometric characteristics. Participants (n = 66) with several shoulder disorders completed the SST-Sp, DASH, VAS and SF-12. The full sample was employed to determine factor structure, internal consistency and concurrent criterion validity. Reliability was determined in the first 24–48 h in a subsample of 21 patients. Results: The SST-Sp showed three factors that explained the 56.1 % of variance, and the internal consistency for each factor was α = 0.738, 0.723 and 0.667, and reliability was ICC = 0.687–0.944. The factor structure was three-dimensional and supported construct validity. Criterion validity determined from the relationship between the SST-Sp and DASH was strong (r = −0.73; p < 0.001) and fair for VAS (r = −0.537; p < 0.001). Relationships between SST-Sp and SF-12 were weak for both physical (r = −0.47; p < 0.001) and mental (r = −0.43; p < 0.001) dimensions. Conclusions: The SST-Sp supports the findings of the original English version as being a valid shoulder outcome measure with similar psychometric properties to the original English version.