The alternate forms reliability of the new tasks added to the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the alternate forms reliability of new tasks vs. old tasks of the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills (AMPS). The participants in this study were 44 persons taken from the AMPS database who had completed two old tasks and two new tasks within a 4-day period. Paired t tests revealed no significant difference between the means of ADL ability measures based on the performance of new vs. old tasks. The Pearson product moment correlations between the ADL ability measures based on the performance of new vs. old tasks was r =.92, p <.001 for motor ability measures and r =.77, p <.001 for process ability measures. We found that 100% of the ADL motor ability measures had standardized differences less than 2.00 (p <.05) and 97% of the ADL process ability measures had standardized differences less than 2.00 (p <.05). Considered together, the results support good alternate forms reliability of the ADL motor and ADL process ability measures. This study supported the finding that the 20 newly calibrated IADL and PADL tasks can be used reliably in clinical practice. When the AMPS is used to evaluate change, we can have 80 to 93% confidence that paired ability measures that change by more than +0.5 logits are the result of actual changes in ability.
Ellison
S
S
Colorado State University, USA. chutzpah1@msn.com
Fisher
A G
AG
Duran
L
L
D000203:Activities of Daily Living / Q000145:classification*; D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D004185:Disability Evaluation; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009048:Motor Skills; D009788:Occupational Therapy / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D011594:Psychometrics; D012016:Reference Values; D015203:Reproducibility of Results