OBJECTIVE: To present a new measure of community integration, the Community Integration Measure (CIM), and to offer preliminary information about its psychometric properties. DESIGN: Validation study. SETTING: Community. PARTICIPANTS: Ninety-two participants placed in 3 subgroups (brain injury survivors, n = 41; significant others, n = 36; college students, n = 15). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The distributional properties, factor structure, internal consistency reliability, content validity, discriminant validity, concurrent validity, and construct validity of the CIM. RESULTS: All items correlated positively with each other and with the total score. Principal components factor analysis confirmed a 1-factor structure, which explained 44.1% of the variance. Internal consistency reliability, using Cronbach's alpha, was.87. Content validity was assured by the development procedure, correspondence with the theoretical model, and direct use of consumer language. Discriminant validity was supported by the CIM's ability to differentiate between subsamples. Criterion validity was supported by using correlations with the Community Integration Questionnaire. Construct validity was supported by correlations with the Interpersonal Support Evaluation List. CONCLUSION: The CIM offers a brief, easily administered measure of community integration that conforms to an empirically derived theoretical model and is psychometrically sound.
OBJECTIVE: To present a new measure of community integration, the Community Integration Measure (CIM), and to offer preliminary information about its psychometric properties. DESIGN: Validation study. SETTING: Community. PARTICIPANTS: Ninety-two participants placed in 3 subgroups (brain injury survivors, n = 41; significant others, n = 36; college students, n = 15). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The distributional properties, factor structure, internal consistency reliability, content validity, discriminant validity, concurrent validity, and construct validity of the CIM. RESULTS: All items correlated positively with each other and with the total score. Principal components factor analysis confirmed a 1-factor structure, which explained 44.1% of the variance. Internal consistency reliability, using Cronbach's alpha, was.87. Content validity was assured by the development procedure, correspondence with the theoretical model, and direct use of consumer language. Discriminant validity was supported by the CIM's ability to differentiate between subsamples. Criterion validity was supported by using correlations with the Community Integration Questionnaire. Construct validity was supported by correlations with the Interpersonal Support Evaluation List. CONCLUSION: The CIM offers a brief, easily administered measure of community integration that conforms to an empirically derived theoretical model and is psychometrically sound.
Authors: Glenn V Ostir; Carl V Granger; Terrie Black; Pamela Roberts; Laura Burgos; Paula Martinkewiz; Kenneth J Ottenbacher Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: J J Carr; M B Kendall; D I Amsters; K J Pershouse; P Kuipers; P Buettner; R N Barker Journal: Spinal Cord Date: 2016-11-29 Impact factor: 2.772
Authors: Elizabeth Bromley; Sonya Gabrielian; Benjamin Brekke; Rohini Pahwa; Kathleen A Daly; John S Brekke; Joel T Braslow Journal: Psychiatr Serv Date: 2013-07-01 Impact factor: 3.084
Authors: Annelies De Wolf; Amanda Lane-Brown; Robyn L Tate; James Middleton; Ian D Cameron Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2010-06-27 Impact factor: 4.147