. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Apr 1.

Published in final edited form as: J Geriatr Phys Ther. 2013 Apr-Jun;36(2):10.1519/JPT.0b013e31825f6777. doi: 10.1519/JPT.0b013e31825f6777

Table 2. Process of Falls Grading Scale Development and Validation.

Step	Purpose	Number	Product
Phase 1: Qualitative Development
Literature review	Data generation	29 articles; 3 standarized falls definitions^a
Candidate falls severity grades	Data synthesis	Hopkins Falls Grading Scale study investigators	Draft Hopkins Falls Grading Scale and several variations (4-5 grades)
Illustration development	Illustrative aid to the grading system	Member of Arts as Applied to Medicine Department at the Johns Hopkins University	Draft illustrated Hopkins Falls Grading Scale and several variations (4-5 grades)
Phase 2: Scale Validation
Semi-structured interviews	Face and content validity	Older individuals (n=4) and providers (n = 12) with diverse expertise in treating older patients at risk of falls	Hopkins Falls Grading Scale (4 grades) with strong face and content validity
Phase 3: Reliability Assessment
Scoring of 30 sample falls shown in video-vignettes based on the Hopkins Falls Grading Scale	Inter-rater reliability	46 participants: 16 healthcare professionals and 30 volunteers	Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.998 (ICC of 0.995 for healthcare professionals and 0.996 for volunteers.)

Kellogg International Work Group on the Prevention of Falls (1987)¹⁴, FICSIT (1993)¹⁵, PROFANE (2005)¹⁶