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

被引：40
作者：
Auger, Claudine
Demers, Louise
Swaine, Bonnie
机构：
[1] Univ Montreal, Inst Geriatr, Res Ctr, Montreal, PQ H3W 1W5, Canada
[2] Univ Montreal, Fac Med, Ecole Readaptat, Montreal, PQ H3C 1J7, Canada
[3] Inst Readaptat Montreal, Ctr Interdisciplinary Rehabil Res, Res Ctr, Montreal, PQ H3S 2J4, Canada
来源：
ARCHIVES OF GERONTOLOGY AND GERIATRICS | 2006年 / 43卷 / 01期
关键词：
applicability; acceptability; assessment; feasibility; geriatric rehabilitation;
D O I：
10.1016/j.archger.2005.09.004
中图分类号：
R592 [老年病学]; C [社会科学总论];
学科分类号：
03 ; 0303 ; 100203 ;
摘要：
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. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码：65 / 83
页数：19
相关论文
共 37 条
[1]   Selecting a generic measure of health-related quality of life for use among older adults - A comparison of candidate instruments [J].
Andresen, EM ;
Rothenberg, BM ;
Panzer, R ;
Katz, P ;
McDermott, MP .
EVALUATION & THE HEALTH PROFESSIONS, 1998, 21 (02) :244-264
[2]   Performance of a self-administered mailed version of the quality of well-being (QWB-SA) questionnaire among older adults [J].
Andresen, EM ;
Rothenberg, BM ;
Kaplan, RM .
MEDICAL CARE, 1998, 36 (09) :1349-1360
[3]   Criteria for assessing the tools of disability outcomes research [J].
Andresen, EM .
ARCHIVES OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION, 2000, 81 (12) :S15-S20
[4]  
BERGNER M, 1987, ANNU REV PUBL HEALTH, V8, P191, DOI 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.8.1.191
[5]  
Bethoux F, 2003, GUIDE OUTILS MESURE
[6]   Feasibility, acceptability and internal consistency reliability of the Nottingham Health Profile in dementia patients [J].
Bureau-Chalot, F ;
Novella, JL ;
Jolly, D ;
Ankri, J ;
Guillemin, F ;
Blanchard, F .
GERONTOLOGY, 2002, 48 (04) :220-225
[7]   The development of a handicap assessment questionnaire: the Impact on Participation and Autonomy (IPA) [J].
Cardol, M ;
de Haan, RJ ;
van den Bos, GAM ;
de Jong, BA ;
de Groot, IJM .
CLINICAL REHABILITATION, 1999, 13 (05) :411-419
[8]   Validity and applicability of the Chinese version of Community Screening Instrument for Dementia [J].
Chan, TF ;
Lam, LCW ;
Chiu, HFK ;
Prince, M .
DEMENTIA AND GERIATRIC COGNITIVE DISORDERS, 2003, 15 (01) :10-18
[9]  
CONNERSPADY BL, 1999, CANADIAN J REHABILIT, V12, P265
[10]   Reliability, validity, and applicability of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology (QUEST 2.0) for adults with multiple sclerosis [J].
Demers, L ;
Monette, M ;
Lapierre, Y ;
Arnold, DL ;
Wolfson, C .
DISABILITY AND REHABILITATION, 2002, 24 (1-3) :21-30
1234