Revision of the Multiple Errands Test-Home (MET-Home) for English Speaking Community Dwelling Adults and Stroke Survivors.

IF 3 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL

Assessment Pub Date : 2026-12-01 Epub Date: 2025-10-24 DOI:10.1177/10731911251384603

Sam S Webb, Suzanne Perea Burns, Nele Demeyere

{"title":"Revision of the Multiple Errands Test-Home (MET-Home) for English Speaking Community Dwelling Adults and Stroke Survivors.","authors":"Sam S Webb, Suzanne Perea Burns, Nele Demeyere","doi":"10.1177/10731911251384603","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We revised 2/14 items on the Multiple Errands Test-Home (MET-Home). We compared the original and the revision and accounted for clinical/demographic covariates of interest. Archival data (N = 144) from neurologically healthy participants (n = 44 revised version, n = 34 original) and survivors of stroke (29 revised version, n = 37 original) were analyzed. We calculated internal consistency and assessed external validity via correlations with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Barthel Index, and Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living scale (NEADL). We provided preliminary reference data (n = 78). MET-Home versions were not statistically different on key outcome scores (p > .05). MET-Home was internally consistent (α = .63 original, α = .80 revised, p = .07). Correlations between MET-Home and external measures were moderate (MoCA: r = .56, p < .001; Barthel: r = .46, p < .001; NEADL: r = .35, p < .001). The revised MET-Home is not statistically different to the original and is just as internally consistent, and we have further evidence of the test's validity. We caution the lack of comprehensive (age and education corrected) normative data.","PeriodicalId":8577,"journal":{"name":"Assessment","volume":" ","pages":"1429-1442"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13675560/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10731911251384603","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/10/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

We revised 2/14 items on the Multiple Errands Test-Home (MET-Home). We compared the original and the revision and accounted for clinical/demographic covariates of interest. Archival data (N = 144) from neurologically healthy participants (n = 44 revised version, n = 34 original) and survivors of stroke (29 revised version, n = 37 original) were analyzed. We calculated internal consistency and assessed external validity via correlations with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Barthel Index, and Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living scale (NEADL). We provided preliminary reference data (n = 78). MET-Home versions were not statistically different on key outcome scores (p > .05). MET-Home was internally consistent (α = .63 original, α = .80 revised, p = .07). Correlations between MET-Home and external measures were moderate (MoCA: r = .56, p < .001; Barthel: r = .46, p < .001; NEADL: r = .35, p < .001). The revised MET-Home is not statistically different to the original and is just as internally consistent, and we have further evidence of the test's validity. We caution the lack of comprehensive (age and education corrected) normative data.

查看原文本刊更多论文

英语社区居住成人和中风幸存者多重任务测试家庭（MET-Home）的修订。

我们修改了多任务测试家庭（MET-Home）的2/14项。我们比较了原始版本和修订版本，并考虑了相关的临床/人口统计学协变量。对神经健康参与者（N = 44修订版，N = 34原件）和中风幸存者（29修订版，N = 37原件）的档案资料（N = 144）进行分析。我们通过与蒙特利尔认知评估（MoCA）、Barthel指数和诺丁汉日常生活扩展活动量表（NEADL）的相关性来计算内部一致性和评估外部效度。我们提供了初步参考资料（n = 78）。MET-Home版本在关键结局评分上无统计学差异（p < 0.05）。MET-Home内部一致（原始α = 0.63，修正α = 0.80, p = 0.07）。MET-Home与外部测量的相关性为中等（MoCA: r = 0.56, p < 0.001; Barthel: r = 0.46, p < 0.001; NEADL: r = 0.35, p < 0.001）。修订后的MET-Home与原始版本在统计上没有差异，而且内部一致，我们有进一步的证据证明测试的有效性。我们警告缺乏全面（年龄和教育校正）的规范性数据。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Assessment PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-

CiteScore

8.90

自引率

2.60%

发文量

期刊介绍： Assessment publishes articles in the domain of applied clinical assessment. The emphasis of this journal is on publication of information of relevance to the use of assessment measures, including test development, validation, and interpretation practices. The scope of the journal includes research that can inform assessment practices in mental health, forensic, medical, and other applied settings. Papers that focus on the assessment of cognitive and neuropsychological functioning, personality, and psychopathology are invited. Most papers published in Assessment report the results of original empirical research, however integrative review articles and scholarly case studies will also be considered.