↓ Skip to main content
What is this page? Embed badge

Brazilian Versions of the Physical Function ICU Test-scored and de Morton Mobility Index: translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and clinimetric properties

Overview of attention for article published in Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia, January 2020
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Summary Twitter Dimensions citations
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Brazilian Versions of the Physical Function ICU Test-scored and de Morton Mobility Index: translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and clinimetric properties
Published in
Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia, January 2020
DOI 10.36416/1806-3756/e20180366
Pubmed ID
32321069
Authors

Vinicius Zacarias Maldaner da Silva, Amanda Sanches Lima, Hilana Nadiele, Ruy Pires-Neto, Linda Denehy, Selina M. Parry

Abstract

The present study aimed to translate and cross-culturally adapt the Physical Function in ICU Test-scored (PFIT-s) and the De Morton Mobility Index (DEMMI) to Brazilian Portuguese. This study consisted of the translation, synthesis, and back-translation of the original versions of the PFIT-s and DEMMI, including revision by the Translation Group and pretesting of the translated version, assessed by an Expert Committee. The Brazilian versions of these instruments were applied to 60 cooperative patients with at least 48 h of mechanical ventilation at ICU discharge. The interrater reliability of both scales was tested using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC). The authors of both original scales have approved the cross-culturally validated versions. Translation and back-translation attained consensus, and no item was changed. Both scales showed good interrater reliability (ICC>0.80) and internal consistency (α>0.80). The versions of the PFIT-s and DEMMI adapted to Brazilian Portuguese proved to be easy to understand and apply clinically in the ICU environment.

View on publisher site

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 14%
Student > Master 3 11%
Unspecified 2 7%
Other 1 4%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 16 57%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 4 14%
Unspecified 2 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 15 54%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 May 2020.
All research outputs
#13,438,659
of 23,203,401 outputs
Outputs from Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia
#193
of 650 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#216,026
of 457,260 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia
#8
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,203,401 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 650 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 457,260 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.

This page is provided by Altmetric.