Standardizing Physical Function Assessments: Can We Use Different Types of Outcome Assessment Tools for Measuring a Common Construct?

Standardizing Physical Function Assessments: Can We Use Different Types of Outcome Assessment Tools for Measuring a Common Construct? - Standardizing PF

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Observational

Source

DRKS

Registry ID

DRKS00032125

Enrollment

800

Registered

2023-06-26

Start date

2023-12-01

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2026-03-02

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Patients from rheumatology, geriatrics, psychosomatic and (psycho-)cardiological rehabilitation, as well as older individuals (<59 years) without patient status.

Interventions

Group 1: The physical function level of rheumatology patients is assessed once through self-report (using PROMIS Physical Function Items) and performance-based measures (using the Physical Performance

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Age

18 Years to No maximum

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: sufficient mental or physical capacity to take part in the study

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: advanced dementia

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
The overall goal of the study is the psychometric calibration of self-reported physical function items (PROMIS PF) and performance-based instruments (Physical Performance Test, Short Physical Performance Battery) to a common scale.	—

Countries

Germany

Contacts

Public ContactGregor Liegl

Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin

gregor.liegl@charite.de+49 30 450 565 259

Outcome results

None listed

Source: DRKS (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Mar 14, 2026