## 3 Results
The total time of test and right-side slide effect sizes were trivial (\(d=-0.05\)) and small (0.17), respectively, while the back slide effect size was medium (\(d\) = 0.35) and the left side--large (\(d=-0.67\)) (Table 1). Visually, the differences in measurements between the two time points are presented in Bland-Altman plots (Figure 1). The agreement of the mean values is presented in the Bland-Altman graph (Figure 2). It is clearly seen that all four variables have good agreement; there are no outliers. and most of the participants are located near and evenly the mean of differences. The confirmation of the good agreement is the values of RC, which are low, 0.20 for total time and below for the rest of the variables. Each plot illustrates agreement between the test and retest results, as well as identifying outliers. Each participant is represented on the graph by a black dot. A solid black line indicates a potential lack of differences and is located at a value of 0.0. The nearest dashed line represents the real mean of differences, which is related to the bias. Next, dotted lines are 95%CI for this mean (confidence interval bounds are colored blue). Upper and lower dashed lines have a 95% agreement interval. Each coexists with its 95%CI. The upper is colored green, while the lower is colored red. The results of the reliability are not so clear. Generally, DRAT has excellent reliability, which confirmed a very high and statistically significant ICC value for the total time of the test (ICC = 0.91, \(p<0.001\)) (Table 1). However, the components received different levels of reliability. Left side slide and right-side slide have moderate, but acceptable reliability (ICC = 0.71, \(p=0.01\); ICC = 0.66, \(p=0.004\), respectively). The worst and poor reliability was observed for the back slide (ICC = 0.45, \(p=0.044\)). The next analysis was to calculate the standard error of measurement, which is different from the intraclass correlation coefficient in that the SEM is an absolute index of reliability and indicates the precision of a test. It is called accuracy. The lower the SEM, the higher the accuracy and reliability. The DRAT has very high accuracy (SEM = 0.02)  
Figure 2: [PERSON] plots for test-retest differences between mean values for four variables: total time of the test, left-side slide, right-side slide, and back slide. with minimal difference needed to be considered real of 0.04 s. All its components received worse SEM indices showing differences between them. The best results were obtained for the right side slide (SEM = 0.04) with an MD of 0.12 s, the next back slide (SEM = 0.09) with a minimal difference of 0.24 s and the left side slide with an MD of 0.39 s.  
At the end, criterion-related validation was conducted with a correlation analysis, as a validity index. The results are presented in Figure 2. The validity of the whole test results was excellent and statistically significant (\(\Phi\) = 0.90, \(p\) < 0.001), while the left-side slide and right-side slide validity were good (\(\Phi\) = 0.72, \(p\) = 0.003 and \(\Phi\) = 0.64, \(p\) = 0.005, respectively). In contrast, the validity of the back slide proved to be poor (\(\Phi\) = 0.46, \(p\) = 0.093).