183 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20127418)
1. Psychometric comparisons of the Stroke Impact Scale 3.0 and Stroke-Specific Quality of Life Scale.
Lin KC; Fu T; Wu CY; Hsieh YW; Chen CL; Lee PC
Qual Life Res; 2010 Apr; 19(3):435-43. PubMed ID: 20127418
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Responsiveness and validity of two outcome measures of instrumental activities of daily living in stroke survivors receiving rehabilitative therapies.
Wu CY; Chuang LL; Lin KC; Horng YS
Clin Rehabil; 2011 Feb; 25(2):175-83. PubMed ID: 21059664
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Validity, responsiveness, and minimal clinically important difference of EQ-5D-5L in stroke patients undergoing rehabilitation.
Chen P; Lin KC; Liing RJ; Wu CY; Chen CL; Chang KC
Qual Life Res; 2016 Jun; 25(6):1585-96. PubMed ID: 26714699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Responsiveness and validity of three dexterous function measures in stroke rehabilitation.
Lin KC; Chuang LL; Wu CY; Hsieh YW; Chang WY
J Rehabil Res Dev; 2010; 47(6):563-71. PubMed ID: 20848369
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Validity, reliability and responsiveness of a short version of the Stroke-Specific Quality of Life Scale in patients receiving rehabilitation.
Chen HF; Wu CY; Lin KC; Li MW; Yu HW
J Rehabil Med; 2012 Jul; 44(8):629-36. PubMed ID: 22729789
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Psychometric properties of the short form of the Stroke Impact Scale in German-speaking stroke survivors.
Coppers A; Möller JC; Marks D
Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2021 Jul; 19(1):190. PubMed ID: 34332592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Responsiveness and validity of three outcome measures of motor function after stroke rehabilitation.
Hsieh YW; Wu CY; Lin KC; Chang YF; Chen CL; Liu JS
Stroke; 2009 Apr; 40(4):1386-91. PubMed ID: 19228851
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Assessing the streamlined Wolf motor function test as an outcome measure for stroke rehabilitation.
Wu CY; Fu T; Lin KC; Feng CT; Hsieh KP; Yu HW; Lin CH; Hsieh CJ; Ota H
Neurorehabil Neural Repair; 2011 Feb; 25(2):194-9. PubMed ID: 20947494
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Responsiveness, Minimal Clinically Important Difference, and Validity of the MoCA in Stroke Rehabilitation.
Wu CY; Hung SJ; Lin KC; Chen KH; Chen P; Tsay PK
Occup Ther Int; 2019; 2019():2517658. PubMed ID: 31097928
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Quality of life in stroke survivors: first results from the reliability and validity of the Italian version of the Stroke Impact Scale 3.0.
Vellone E; Savini S; Barbato N; Carovillano G; Caramia M; Alvaro R
Ann Ig; 2010; 22(5):469-79. PubMed ID: 21381542
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The stroke impact scale 3.0: evaluation of acceptability, reliability, and validity of the Brazilian version.
Carod-Artal FJ; Coral LF; Trizotto DS; Moreira CM
Stroke; 2008 Sep; 39(9):2477-84. PubMed ID: 18635846
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Internal consistency and validity of the Stroke Impact Scale 2.0 (SIS 2.0) and SIS-16 in an Australian sample.
Edwards B; O'Connell B
Qual Life Res; 2003 Dec; 12(8):1127-35. PubMed ID: 14651430
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Test-retest reliability and responsiveness of the Barthel Index-based Supplementary Scales in patients with stroke.
Lee YC; Yu WH; Hsueh IP; Chen SS; Hsieh CL
Eur J Phys Rehabil Med; 2017 Oct; 53(5):710-718. PubMed ID: 28178771
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Rasch analysis of a new stroke-specific outcome scale: the Stroke Impact Scale.
Duncan PW; Bode RK; Min Lai S; Perera S;
Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 2003 Jul; 84(7):950-63. PubMed ID: 12881816
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The stroke impact scale: performance as a quality of life measure in a community-based stroke rehabilitation setting.
Richardson M; Campbell N; Allen L; Meyer M; Teasell R
Disabil Rehabil; 2016 Jul; 38(14):1425-30. PubMed ID: 26517368
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A study of predictive validity, responsiveness, and minimal clinically important difference of arm accelerometer in real-world activity of patients with chronic stroke.
Chen HL; Lin KC; Hsieh YW; Wu CY; Liing RJ; Chen CL
Clin Rehabil; 2018 Jan; 32(1):75-83. PubMed ID: 28580791
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Psychometric comparisons of 2 versions of the Fugl-Meyer Motor Scale and 2 versions of the Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment of Movement.
Hsueh IP; Hsu MJ; Sheu CF; Lee S; Hsieh CL; Lin JH
Neurorehabil Neural Repair; 2008; 22(6):737-44. PubMed ID: 18645189
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Stroke and Aphasia Quality of Life Scale-39 (SAQOL-39): evaluation of acceptability, reliability, and validity.
Hilari K; Byng S; Lamping DL; Smith SC
Stroke; 2003 Aug; 34(8):1944-50. PubMed ID: 12855827
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Refining 3 Measures to Construct an Efficient Functional Assessment of Stroke.
Wang YL; Lin GH; Huang YJ; Chen MH; Hsieh CL
Stroke; 2017 Jun; 48(6):1630-1635. PubMed ID: 28468925
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Validity of the SS-QOL in Germany and in survivors of hemorrhagic or ischemic stroke.
Ewert T; Stucki G
Neurorehabil Neural Repair; 2007; 21(2):161-8. PubMed ID: 17312091
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
