{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03498542274052478, 'fraction_numerical': 0.014577259475218658, 'mean_word_length': 4.76890756302521, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?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}}
The Minnesota Manual Dexterity Test: Reliability, Validity and Reference Values Studies with Healthy Elderly People

Several dexterity tests have been developed, including the Minnesota Rate of Manipulation Test (MRMT) and a new version, the Minnesota Manual Dexterity Test (MMDT). The objectives of the study were: a) to verify the test-retest reliability of the MMDT; b) to compare the MRMT and the MMDT; c) to study the concurrent validity of the MMDT; and d) to establish reference values for elderly people with the MMDT. Two hundred and forty-seven community-living healthy elderly were evaluated with the MMDT, and two other dexterity tests, the Box and Block Test (BBT) and the Purdue Pegboard (PP). Thirty-five of them were evaluated twice with the MMDT and 44 were evaluated with both the MMDT and MRMT. The results show that the test-retest reliability of the MMDT is acceptable to high (intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.79 to 0.87, depending on the subtest) and the validity of the test is demonstrated by significant correlations between the MMDT, the BBT and the PP (0.63 to 0.67). There is a high correlation (0.85 to 0.95) between the MMDT and the MMRT in spite of different results. The reference values will help occupational therapists to differentiate better between real dexterity difficulties and those that may be attributed to normal aging.