Sonja Mensch

33 A systematic review of the literature Table 4. Psychometrics of the included instruments Instrument Study Study population Psychometrics Methodological quality Diagnoses N Age (Y) COSMIN property Results Rating COSMIN boxes* 1 Rating of results* 2 The Chailey Levels of Ability (CLA) (Pountney et al., 1999) CP 85 1.5-18 Content validity The nine constructs outlined in the assessment were identifiable Poor + 29 4.5-19 Construct validity Pearsons AIMS .90-.97 Pearsons GMFM .85-.96 Poor + Gross Motor Function Measure (GMFM-88) (Ketelaar et al., 1999; Dutch version) CP 111 1.6-10.11 Internal consistency ICC= .90-.98 Poor + 16 Test-retest reliability ICC= .96-.99 Poor + 18 Inter-rater reliability ICC= .75-.99 Poor + 150 Responsiveness Kendall’s tau .45 F(4,99)=2.56,p<.05 Student t-test t(27)=4.7, p<.001 Poor + (Russell et al., 1989) CP 10 <3- >9 Intra-rater reliability ICC= .99 Poor + 11 Inter-rater reliability ICC= .99 Poor + CP/ ABI/ ND 47/ 22/ 28 Responsiveness Correlations of GMFM total score with change as judged by external therapists/ parents/ blind video analysis: .65/.54/.82 (p<.05) Poor + (Russell et al., 1998) DS 22 0.4-5.6 Test-retest reliability ICC standard/reported score = .95/.96 Poor + Inter-rater reliability ICC standard/reported score = .96/.98 Poor + CP/ ABI/ ND 106/69/ 30 0.1-6 Responsiveness Correlation of GMFM total score with change as judged by parent/intervenor/ video: standard scoring = .16/.24/.29 Reported scoring = .32/.30/.34 Fair -