Annmarie Kelleher1,2, Brad E Dicianno1,3, Stacy Eckstein1,2, Richard Schein2, Jonathan Pearlman1,2, Rory A Cooper1,2. 1. Human Engineering Research Laboratories, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 2. Department of Rehabilitation Science and Technology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 3. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Abstract
Objective: The overall objective of this project was to identify consumers' opinions of their needs and wants related to assistive technology (AT) in a systematic and quantitative manner via a questionnaire that can be used to validate existing and establish new research priorities. Methods: This pilot study describes questionnaire development, online implementation, and revisions considered to the questionnaire in preparation for conducting a nationwide survey. Data from a sample (N = 112) are presented. The pilot study was critical to refine the questions and ensure that meaningful information was being collected. Results: It was identified that revisions were warranted to provide more structure and allow for consumers to prioritize AT research efforts. Conclusion: The questionnaire results, although positively in favor of many of the technologies presented, are inconclusive to identify generalizable research priorities, thus expansion to a nationwide population is warranted.
Objective: The overall objective of this project was to identify consumers' opinions of their needs and wants related to assistive technology (AT) in a systematic and quantitative manner via a questionnaire that can be used to validate existing and establish new research priorities. Methods: This pilot study describes questionnaire development, online implementation, and revisions considered to the questionnaire in preparation for conducting a nationwide survey. Data from a sample (N = 112) are presented. The pilot study was critical to refine the questions and ensure that meaningful information was being collected. Results: It was identified that revisions were warranted to provide more structure and allow for consumers to prioritize AT research efforts. Conclusion: The questionnaire results, although positively in favor of many of the technologies presented, are inconclusive to identify generalizable research priorities, thus expansion to a nationwide population is warranted.
Authors: Eliana S Chaves; Michael L Boninger; Rosemarie Cooper; Shirley G Fitzgerald; David B Gray; Rory A Cooper Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Hongwu Wang; Jijie Xu; Garrett Grindle; Juan Vazquez; Ben Salatin; Annmarie Kelleher; Dan Ding; Diane M Collins; Rory A Cooper Journal: Med Eng Phys Date: 2013-06-12 Impact factor: 2.242
Authors: Rachel E Cowan; Benjamin J Fregly; Michael L Boninger; Leighton Chan; Mary M Rodgers; David J Reinkensmeyer Journal: J Neuroeng Rehabil Date: 2012-04-20 Impact factor: 4.262
Authors: Elizabeth A Courtney-Long; Dianna D Carroll; Qing C Zhang; Alissa C Stevens; Shannon Griffin-Blake; Brian S Armour; Vincent A Campbell Journal: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep Date: 2015-07-31 Impact factor: 17.586
Authors: Brad E Dicianno; James Joseph; Stacy Eckstein; Christina K Zigler; Eleanor J Quinby; Mark R Schmeler; Richard M Schein; Jon Pearlman; Rory A Cooper Journal: Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol Date: 2018-03-20
Authors: Brad E Dicianno; James Joseph; Stacy Eckstein; Christina K Zigler; Eleanor Quinby; Mark R Schmeler; Richard M Schein; Jon Pearlman; Rory A Cooper Journal: Mil Med Date: 2018-11-01 Impact factor: 1.437