Reliability and validity of the Canadian Occupat189ional Performance Measure in stroke patients
Pourquoi ce travail est-il dans la base ?
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.
Scores machine (provisoires)
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
- Écart entre enseignants
- 0,342 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
- Statut de validation
score_only:v0-immature-baseline· tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle
Résumé
OBJECTIVE: To research test-retest reliability and discriminant validity of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), a client-centred outcome measure, in stroke patients. DESIGN: The COPM was administered twice with a mean interval of eight days (SD 2.5, range 5-16). On both occasions the patient identified a maximum of five problems in daily activities. The problems of both interviews were compared. The problems identified during the first COPM were rated by the patient on a performance and satisfaction rating scale on both occasions. The individually identified items with use of the client-centred COPM were compared with the fixed items of standardized measures (Barthel Index, Frenchay Activities Index, Stroke Adapted Sickness Impact Profile-30, Euroqol 5D and Rankin Scale). SETTING: Patients were interviewed at their place of residence. SUBJECTS: Twenty-six stroke patients participated, 11 men and 15 women, aged from 26 to 83 years (mean 68, SD 15). Twenty-four patients were six months, two patients were two months post stroke. RESULTS: Of the 115 problems identified during the first COPM, 64 (56%) were also identified the second time. Correlation coefficients for the scores were 0.89 (p < 0.001) for performance and 0.88 (p < 0.001) for satisfaction. Of the individual problems identified with the COPM, 25% or less were present in the standardized measures. Correlations between the scores on the COPM and the standardized measures were low and nonsignificant, while all standardized measures correlated significantly with each other. CONCLUSIONS: Test-retest reliability of the COPM was moderate for the item pool but was good for the performance and satisfaction scores. Discriminant validity was confirmed. Many patient-unique problems identified with the COPM were not evaluated by standardized measures.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
La notice
- Revue
- Clinical Rehabilitation
- Thématique
- Occupational Therapy Practice and Research
- Domaine
- Health Professions
- Établissements canadiens
- —
- Organismes subventionnaires
- Erasmus+
- Mots-clés
- Physical therapyStroke (engine)MedicineActivities of daily livingBarthel indexModified Rankin ScaleRating scalePsychologyDiscriminant validityPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychometricsClinical psychologyIschemic strokeInternal medicineInternal consistency
- Résumé présent dans OpenAlex
- oui