English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Context: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) item banks have been validated for general populations, but their application to high-functioning patient populations remains speculative. Objective: To examine the measurement properties of the PROMIS physical function item bank, version 1.0, when applied to individuals representing high levels of physical ability. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I and III collegiate athletic training rooms and intramural events. Patients or Other Participants: A heterogeneous sample of 215 adults from Division I or Division III collegiate or recreational sports volunteered for this study. Participants were divided into 4 groups depending on sport activity and injury status: healthy collegiate (HC; 33 men, 37 women; age = 19.7 ± 1.1 years), injured and currently active in sport (IP; 21 men, 29 women; age = 19.9 ± 1.2 years), injured and currently not active in sport (INP; 12 men, 18 women; age = 19.7 ± 1.3 years), and healthy recreational (HR; 47 men, 18 women; age = 20.1 ± 1.4 years). Main Outcome Measure(s): Participants completed 2 assessments: (1) an injury-history questionnaire and (2) the PROMIS physical function item bank, version 1.0, in computer-adaptive form. Mean PROMIS physical function scores were determined for each group. Results: The PROMIS physical function score for the HC group (61.7 ± 6.0) was higher than for the IP (54.9 ± 7.5) and INP (44.1 ± 8.2) groups (P &amp;lt; .001). The IP group had a higher score than the INP group (P &amp;lt; .001). Mean PROMIS scores were not different between the HC and HR participants (mean difference = 1.9, P = .10). Conclusions: The computer-adaptive PROMIS physical function item bank, version 1.0, accurately distinguished injury status in elite-level athletes on a physical function latent trait continuum. Although it was unable to distinguish HC athletes from HR athletes, exposing a possible ceiling effect, it offers potential for use as an outcome instrument for athletic trainers and other sports medicine clinicians.

journal of athletic training

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function Item Bank, Version 1.0: Physical Function Assessment for Athletic Patient Populations