Literature DB >> 15083418

Empowerment in measurement: "muscle," "voice," and subjective quality of life as a gold standard.

Margaret Brown1, Wayne A Gordon.   

Abstract

Measurement and assessment, occurring within both research and clinical service contexts, typically involve an imbalance of power between professionals and persons with disabilities. Power is evidenced in who controls decisions about measurement and whose perspective--the subjective values of the measured person or the objective or normative values of the measurer--is given primacy. The consequences of this imbalance are discussed with respect to both sides of the power relationship. For clinicians, evaluators, and researchers, who typically hold most, if not all of the power in measurement, the process may produce data that meet the highest professional standards. However, the utility of such data is limited in addressing many purposes. For research participants and service recipients, who typically have little if any control of measurement, the measurement process may be disempowering, because measures focus on areas of life that may be of little relevance to what they see as important. In effect, both sides lose, to the degree that resulting data are less revealing than would be the case in a more balanced power relationship. Methods are discussed for reducing power imbalances to improve the utility and efficacy of measurement.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15083418     DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2003.08.110

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil        ISSN: 0003-9993            Impact factor:   3.966


  5 in total

1.  Individualized measurement of quality of life in older adults: development and pilot testing of a new tool.

Authors:  Martin Holzhausen; Adelheid Kuhlmey; Peter Martus
Journal:  Eur J Ageing       Date:  2010-08-27

2.  Recovery from disablement: what functional abilities do rehabilitation professionals value the most?

Authors:  Pamela M Rist; Damean W Freas; Greg Maislin; Margaret G Stineman
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2008-07-02       Impact factor: 3.966

Review 3.  [Patient view in the assessment of quality of life in old age: potentials and limits].

Authors:  M Holzhausen; U Bornschlegel; T Fischer
Journal:  Z Gerontol Geriatr       Date:  2009-06-20       Impact factor: 1.281

4.  Disability meanings according to patients and clinicians: imagined recovery choice pathways.

Authors:  Margaret G Stineman; Pamela M Rist; Jibby E Kurichi; Greg Maislin
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2009-02-04       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 5.  Multidisciplinary rehabilitation for adults with multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  F Khan; L Turner-Stokes; L Ng; T Kilpatrick
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2007-04-18
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.