Cultural advice

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are advised that ANU Library collections may include images, names, voices, and other representations of deceased persons.

Material in the collection may contain terms, language or views that reflect the period in which the item was created and may be considered inappropriate today.

Internal consistency and validity of the Stroke Impact Scale 2.0 (SIS 2.0) and SIS-16 in an Australian sample

dc.contributor.authorEdwards, Ben
dc.contributor.authorO'Connell, Ben
dc.date.accessioned2025-06-24T06:35:12Z
dc.date.available2025-06-24T06:35:12Z
dc.date.issued2003en
dc.description.abstractBackground and Purpose: The impact of stroke is multidimensional however standard stroke measures do not discriminate well when stroke patients are less physically impaired. The Stroke Impact Scale 2.0 (SIS 2.0) is a multidimensional measure of the impact of stroke but its' psychometric properties require further testing. The SIS-16 is a measure of physical functioning designed to be more sensitive to differences in physical functioning than current stroke outcome measures but there is only preliminary information detailing its' reliability and validity. The current study examined the internal consistency and validity of the SIS 2.0 and SIS-16 in an Australian sample of stroke patients. Methods: The SIS 2.0, SIS-16, World Health Organization Bref-Scale (WHOQOL-BREF) and Zung's Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS) were completed by 74 stroke patients in rural Victoria, Australia. Results: The item convergent validity index indicated good item convergence of the SIS-16 and SIS 2.0 domains. The item discriminant validity index had only adequate divergence for most SIS 2.0 domains. Internal consistencies of the SIS-16 and SIS 2.0 domains were acceptable (alpha = 0.87-0.95). Correlations between the SIS-16 and SIS 2.0 and the WHOQOL-BREF and SDS supported the convergent and discriminant validity of the SIS-16 and all the dimensions of the SIS 2.0 except 'Participation' which lacked discriminant validity. Conclusions: The SIS 2.0 and SIS-16 had good psychometric properties with support for the internal consistency and validity of both measures.en
dc.description.statusPeer-revieweden
dc.format.extent9en
dc.identifier.issn0962-9343en
dc.identifier.otherWOS:000185977800021en
dc.identifier.otherPubMed:14651430en
dc.identifier.otherORCID:/0000-0001-6041-5054/work/162950712en
dc.identifier.scopus0242658696en
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=anu_research_portal_plus2&SrcAuth=WosAPI&KeyUT=WOS:000185977800021&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=WOS_CPLen
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1885/733764744
dc.language.isoenen
dc.sourceQuality of Life Researchen
dc.subjectSis-16en
dc.subjectStroke Impact Scaleen
dc.subjectInternal consistencyen
dc.subjectOutcomeen
dc.titleInternal consistency and validity of the Stroke Impact Scale 2.0 (SIS 2.0) and SIS-16 in an Australian sampleen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dspace.entity.typePublicationen
local.bibliographicCitation.lastpage1135en
local.bibliographicCitation.startpage1127en
local.contributor.affiliationEdwards, B; POLIS: The Centre for Social Policy Research, Research School of Social Sciences, ANU College of Arts & Social Sciences, The Australian National Universityen
local.identifier.citationvolume12en
local.identifier.doi10.1023/A:1026109920478en
local.identifier.puref91f0ac8-5e5f-4f24-b8e8-f9c9d52018d9en
local.identifier.urlhttps://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=anu_research_portal_plus2&SrcAuth=WosAPI&KeyUT=WOS:000185977800021&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=WOS_CPLen
local.type.statusPublisheden

Downloads