{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04143475572047001, 'fraction_numerical': 0.012987012987012988, 'mean_word_length': 5.3203125, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparison of the structural validity of three Balance Evaluation Systems Test in older adults with femoral or vertebral fracture.

OBJECTIVE
To clarify and compare the structural validity of 3 Balance Evaluation Systems Tests (BESTest, Mini-BESTest, and Brief-BESTest) in older adults with femoral or vertebral fractures.


DESIGN
Cross-sectional study.


SUBJECTS
Ninety-four older adults (age ≥ 65 years) with femoral or vertebral fractures, who could walk without physical assistance.


METHODS
Four BESTest models (BESTest, one-factor Mini-BESTest, four-factor Mini-BESTest, and Brief-BESTest) were examined using confirmatory factor analysis, and the models' goodness-of-fit was assessed. Unidimensionality of the best-fitting model was confirmed by Rasch principal component analysis on the residuals.


RESULTS
Confirmatory factor analysis showed that the four-factor Mini-BESTest model (comparative fit index = 0.952; Tucker-Lewis index = 0.937; root-mean square error of approximation = 0.060; standardized root-mean-square residual = 0.062) has a better structure than other models. The principal component analysis of standardized residuals showed that the variance attributable to Rasch factor was good, with eigenvalues < 2, confirming the factor's unidimensionality.


CONCLUSION
The four-factor Mini-BESTest model shows good structural validity in older adults with femoral or vertebral fracture. Evaluating dynamic balance by focusing on 4 components (anticipatory postural adjustments, postural responses, sensory orientation, and stability in gait) may help therapists in making clinical decisions.