Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37713251›Full record

ArticleJMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies2023

A Digital Box and Block Test for Hand Dexterity Measurement: Instrument Validation Study.

Eveline Prochaska, Elske Ammenwerth

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06955078 (Effects of Visual Motor Integration on Visual Perception, Spatial Awareness and Motor Skills in Preschool Children), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT06955078 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Effects of Visual Motor Integration on Visual Perception, Spatial Awareness and Motor Skills in Preschool Children

TypeinterventionalSponsorRiphah International UniversityRan2025 to 2025Enrolled60ConditionsPreschool ChildrenArmsVisual Motor Integration
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Eveline ProchaskaInstitute of Applied Electronics and Technical Informatics, University of Applied Sciences Campus Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7609-1565
Elske AmmenwerthInstitute of Medical Informatics, Private University for Health Sciences and Health Technology, Hall in Tirol, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3244-6918
UMIT - Private Universität für Gesundheitswissenschaften, Medizinische Informatik und Technik · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Box and Block Test (BBT) measures unilateral gross manual dexterity and is widely used in clinical settings with a wide range of populations, including older people and clients with neurological disorders.

objectiveIn this study, we present a newly developed digitized version of the BBT, called the digital BBT (dBBT). The physical design is similar to the original BBT, but the dBBT contains digital electronics that automate the test procedure, timing, and score measurement. The aim of this study is to investigate the validity and reliability of the dBBT.

methodsWe performed measurements at 2 time points for 29 healthy participants. BBT and dBBT were used at the first measurement time point, and dBBT was used again at the second measurement time point. Concurrent validity was assessed using the correlation between BBT and dBBT, the paired t test, and the Bland-Altman analysis. Test-retest reliability and interrater reliability were examined using the interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) by repeated measures with the dBBT within an interval of 10 days.

resultsOur results showed moderate concurrent validity (r=0.48, P=.008), moderate test-retest reliability (ICC 0.72, P<.001), a standard error of measurement of 3.1 blocks, and the smallest detectable change at a 95% CI of 8.5 blocks. Interrater reliability was moderate with an ICC of 0.67 (P=.02). The Bland-Altman analysis showed sufficient accuracy of the dBBT in comparison with the conventional BBT.

conclusionsThe dBBT can contribute to objectifying the measurement of gross hand dexterity without losing its important characteristics and is simple to implement.

Indexed as

assessmentBBTBox and Block Testconcurrent validitydBBTdexteritydigital Box and Block Testhand dexterity assessmentinterrater reliabilitytest-retest reliabilityvalidatevalidity

Identifiers

PMID37713251
PMCPMC10541645
OpenAlexW4385842230

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.