NIH Toolbox for Assessment of Neurological and Behavioral Function - NIH Toolbox 4-Meter Walk Gait Speed Test Age 7+ v2.0

COA At-a-Glance

Evidence of cognitive interviewing of draft instrument in target patient population

Evidence of internal consistency

Evidence of test-retest or inter-rater reliability

Evidence of concurrent validity

Evidence of known-groups validity

Evidence of ability to detect change over time

Evidence of responder thresholds

Inclusion of the COA in product labelling

Daily function
Gross motor function

Overview

Instrument Name: NIH Toolbox for Assessment of Neurological and Behavioral Function - NIH Toolbox 4-Meter Walk Gait Speed Test Age 7+ v2.0

Abbreviation: NIH Toolbox 4-Meter Walk Gait Speed Test Age 7+ v2.0

Points for Consideration:

No data on diagnostic populations

Description of Tool:

The NIH Toolbox 4MWT Age7+, v2.0 is a PerfO which measures the total time required to walk 4 meters (in seconds), using the better of 2 trials. Lower scores represent better locomotion.

Minimum Qualification Required by COA Administrator: MA or BA

Comment:

The NIH Toolbox 4-Meter Walk Gait Speed Test Age 7+ v2.0 is a specific test within the NIH Toolbox Locomotion
The NIH Toolbox Locomotion is a subdomain within the NIH Toolbox Motor Battery

Year: 2013

Objective of Development:

To measure motor function across the age span from 3 to 85 years, with a focus on locomotion

Population of Development: Age range (therapeutic indication):

7-85 years (All)

Pediatric Population(s) in which COA has been used:

Wounds and Injuries

COA type: PerfO

Number of Items 2x 1 task

Mode of Administration: Interviewer-administered

Data Collection Mode: Computer-administered

Time for Completion: 3 minutes

Response Scales: Time (in seconds),

Summary of Scoring:

Available Score:
Score by items: Raw score; Computed score (meter-per-seconds metric)

Weighting:
No

Score Interpretation:
Lower score = Better locomotion

Content Validity

Evidence of Literature Review: Yes

Evidence of Instrument Review: Yes

Evidence of Clinical or Expert Input: Yes

Evidence of concept elicitation in target patient population: None identified

Evidence of a Saturation Grid: Not applicable

Evidence for Selection of Data Collection Method: None identified

Recall/Observation Period: Present time

Evidence for Selection of Reponse Options: None identified

Evidence of cognitive interviewing of draft instrument in target patient population: None identified

Evidence of Preliminary Scoring of Items and Domains: Not applicable

Evidence related to respondent and administrator burden: Yes

Evidence of a Conceptual Framework: None identified

Evidence of an item-tracking matrix: Not applicable

Evidence related to item selection: Not applicable

Evidence of re-testing the final version: Yes

Reliability

Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha): Not applicable

Test-retest Reliability (ICC):

Reuben DB (2013)
- Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC)(95% Confidence Interval): 0.64 (0.45-0.77)
- Was a definition of stability applied to identify stable patients: No
- Time frame or interval between the two administrations: 7 - 21 days
- Population/Disease: Healthy individuals aged 3-85 years ; n=54

Inter-rater/ inter-interviewer reliability (kappa):

Not applicable

Evidence of test-retest or inter-rater reliability: Yes

Validity

Concurrent validity (convergent, divergent):

Reuben DB (2013)
- Correlation coefficient used: Pearson's correlation coefficient
- Measure: 20-ft walk time
- Results: r=-0.82; p<0.05 - Population/Disease: Healthy individuals aged 3-85 years; n=331

Known-group validity:

None identified

Evidence of Translatability Assessment: None identified

Evidence related to missing data: None identified

Evidence for Selection of Recall Period: None identified

Evidence of Administration Instructions and Training Provided: None identified

Evidence of concurrent validity: Yes

Evidence of known-groups validity: None identified

Evidence of ability to detect change over time: None identified

Ability to Detect Change

Ability to detect change (Responsiveness):

None identified

Responder Thresholds

Evidence of responder thresholds: None identified

Reference(s) of development / validation

Reuben DB, Magasi S, McCreath HE, BohanNon RW, Wang YC, Bubela DJ, Rymer WZ, Beaumont J, Rine RM, Lai JS, Gershon RC. Motor assessment using the NIH Toolbox. Neurology. 2013 Mar 12;80(11 Suppl 3):S65-75
(Full Text Article: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3662336/pdf/WNL204799.pdf)

Other references

BohanNon RW, Bubela D, Magasi S, McCreath H, Wang YC, Reuben D, Rymer WZ, Gershon R. Comparison of walking performance over the first 2 minutes and the full 6 minutes of the Six-Minute Walk Test. BMC Res Notes. 2014 Apr 25;7:269 (Full text article: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/24767634/)

HealthMeasures website: https://www.healthmeasures.net/explore-measurement-systems/nih-toolbox

Inclusion of the COA in product labelling

None identified

Existence of Scoring / Interpretation / User Manual

Yes

Original language and translations

Original language: English for the USA

Translations:
Spanish

References of translations

None identified

Authors and contact information

Authors:
Reuben DB, Magasi S, McCreath HE, BohanNon RW, Wang YC, Bubela DJ, Rymer WZ, Beaumont J, Rine RM, Lai JS, Gershon RC

Contact:
National Institute of Health (NIH)
E-mail: cognition@nihtoolbox.org


Website

Health Measures website (http://www.healthmeasures.net/explore-measurement-systems/nih-toolbox/obtain-and-administer-measures)

Review copy

Review copy available here (http://www.healthmeasures.net/index.php?Itemid=992)