Skip to main content

Table 3 Results of quality of studies on the psychometric properties of instruments for sensory and motor assessment after nerve repair based on “Critical Appraisal of Study Quality for Psychometric Articles: Evaluation Form” [46]

From: Functional, motor, and sensory assessment instruments upon nerve repair in adult hands: systematic review of psychometric properties

Study 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total Percent
Jerosch-Herold [47] 2 2 0 1 0 NA 2 1 1 1 0 1 11 45.8
Brandsma et al. [60] 1 1 1 1 0 2 2 2 2 2 0 1 15 62.5
Rosén [61] 2 2 0 1 0 NA 2 2 2 2 0 2 15 62.5
Rosén and Lundborg [55] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 21 87.5
Rosén and Jerosh-Herold [59] 2 2 2 0 0 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 18 75
Rosén and Lundborg [24] 2 1 0 1 0 NA 2 1 1 1 1 2 12 50
Jerosch-Herold [57] 1 2 0 0 0 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 15 62.5
Rosén [56] 2 1 2 0 0 NA 1 1 2 2 2 2 15 62.5
Schreuders et al. [48] 2 1 0 0 0 NA 2 2 2 2 0 2 13 54.2
Jerosch-Herold et al. [54] 2 1 2 1 0 NA 2 2 2 1 2 2 17 70.8
Carlsson et al. [49] 2 2 2 2 0 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 17 70.8
Dias et al. [50] 1 2 0 2 0 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 15 62.5
Naidu et al. [52] 1 2 0 2 0 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 16 66.7
Packham and MacDermid [53] 2 1 2 2 2 NA 2 2 2 2 2 2 21 95.4
Chen et al. [51] 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 22 91.6
Hsu et al. [58] 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 0 1 14 58.3
  1. Item evaluation criteria of critical appraisal tool. NA not applicable
Back to article page