Literature DB >> 16257067

Making sense of pragmatic criteria for the selection of geriatric rehabilitation measurement tools.

Claudine Auger1, Louise Demers, Bonnie Swaine.   

Abstract

In geriatric rehabilitation, the selection of the most appropriate measurement tools involves pragmatic as well as psychometric considerations. However, there is no consensus about the conceptual and operational definitions of the pragmatic criteria involved in this selection. The objective of this research was to identify such operational criteria through a literature search between 1995 and 2004. Results identified operational criteria that were grouped under four categories using a conceptual mapping methodology: respondent burden, examiner burden, score distribution and format compatibility. We recommend the umbrella term applicability to refer to this grouping of pragmatic qualities of a measurement tool. Examining the applicability of measurement tools should assist clinicians and researchers in selecting the most appropriate for use in geriatric rehabilitation.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16257067     DOI: 10.1016/j.archger.2005.09.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Gerontol Geriatr        ISSN: 0167-4943            Impact factor:   3.250


  8 in total

1.  Reliability and validity of the telephone administration of the wheelchair outcome measure (WhOM) for middle-aged and older users of power mobility devices.

Authors:  Claudine Auger; Louise Demers; Isabelle Gélinas; François Routhier; W Ben Mortenson; William C Miller
Journal:  J Rehabil Med       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 2.912

Review 2.  Issues for the selection of wheelchair-specific activity and participation outcome measures: a review.

Authors:  William B Mortenson; William C Miller; Claudine Auger
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 3.966

3.  Updating the OMERACT filter: discrimination and feasibility.

Authors:  George Wells; Dorcas E Beaton; Peter Tugwell; Maarten Boers; John R Kirwan; Clifton O Bingham; Annelies Boonen; Peter Brooks; Philip G Conaghan; Maria-Antonietta D'Agostino; Maxime Dougados; Daniel E Furst; Laure Gossec; Francis Guillemin; Philip Helliwell; Sarah Hewlett; Tore K Kvien; Robert B Landewé; Lyn March; Philip J Mease; Mikkel Ostergaard; Lee Simon; Jasvinder A Singh; Vibeke Strand; Désirée M van der Heijde
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  2014-04-01       Impact factor: 4.666

4.  A Sensibility Assessment of the Job Demands and Accommodation Planning Tool (JDAPT): A Tool to Help Workers with an Episodic Disability Plan Workplace Support.

Authors:  Monique A M Gignac; Julie Bowring; Sabrina Tonima; Renee-Louise Franche; Aaron Thompson; Arif Jetha; Peter M Smith; Joy C Macdermid; William S Shaw; Dwayne Van Eerd; Dorcas E Beaton; Emma Irvin; Emile Tompa; Ron Saunders
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2022-07-14

5.  The Applicability of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) in Rehabilitation for Patients with Acquired Brain Injury (ABI) - A Cohort Study.

Authors:  Janne Evensen; Helene Lundgaard Soberg; Unni Sveen; Knut A Hestad; Berit Arnesveen Bronken
Journal:  J Multidiscip Healthc       Date:  2020-10-09

6.  Canadian Physiotherapy Assessment of Clinical Performance: Face and Content Validity.

Authors:  Brenda Mori; Kathleen E Norman; Dina Brooks; Jodi Herold; Dorcas E Beaton
Journal:  Physiother Can       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 1.037

7.  Mobile applications for participation at the shopping mall: content analysis and usability for persons with physical disabilities and communication or cognitive limitations.

Authors:  Claudine Auger; Emilie Leduc; Delphine Labbé; Cassioppée Guay; Brigitte Fillion; Carolina Bottari; Bonnie Swaine
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2014-12-10       Impact factor: 3.390

Review 8.  Quality of mobility measures among individuals with acquired brain injury: an umbrella review.

Authors:  Rehab Alhasani; Claudine Auger; Matheus Paiva Azevedo; Sara Ahmed
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2022-03-11       Impact factor: 3.440

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.