Is telephone assessment a valid tool in rehabilitation research and practice?

Disability and Rehabilitation

Volumn 25, Issue 19, 2003, Pages 1126-1131

  Day, Hy ^a   Campbell, Kent A ^b  

^a YORK UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMAN; INFORMATION; INTERVIEW; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; QUESTIONNAIRE; RATING SCALE; REHABILITATION MEDICINE; RELIABILITY; SCORING SYSTEM; TELEPHONE; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; DISABLED PERSONS; EYEGLASSES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; QUESTIONNAIRES; TELEPHONE;

EID: 0141539231     PISSN: 09638288     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0963828031000152057     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Taylor AW, Wilson DH, Wakefield M. Differences in health estimates using telephone and door-to-door methods-a hypothetical exercise. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 1998; 22(2): 223-226.
2. Korner-Bitensky N, Wood-Dauphinee S, Shapiro S, Becker R. Health-related information postdischarge: Telephone versus face-to-face interviewing. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 1994; 75: 1287-1296.
3. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales: A practical guide to their development and use. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989.
4. van Ooijen M, Ivens UI, Johansen C, Skov T. Comparison of a self-administered questionnaire and a telephone interview of 146 Danish waste collectors. American Journal of Industrial Medicine 1997; 31: 653-658.
5. Aneshensel CS, Frerichs RR, Clark VA, Yokopenic PA. Measuring depression in the community: a comparison of telephone and personal interviews. Public Opinion Quarterly 1982; 46: 110-121.
6. Wilson K, Roe B, Wright L. Telephone or face-to-face interviews? A decision made on the basis of a pilot study. International Journal of Nursing Studies 1998; 35: 314-321.
7. ASCF Principal Investigators and their associates. Analysis of sexual behaviour in France (ASCF). A comparison between two modes of investigation: telephone survey and face-to-face survey. AIDS 1992; 6(3): 315-323.
8. Rohde P, Lewinsohn PM, Seeley MS. Comparability of telephone and face-to-face interviews in assessing Axis I and II disorders. American Journal a Psychiatry 1997; 154: 1593-1598.
9. Pruchno RA, Hayden JM. Interview modality: Effects on costs and data quality in a sample of older women. Journal of Aging and Health 2000; 12(1): 3-24.
10. Freeman HE, Kiecolt KJ, Nicholls II WL, Shanks JM. Telephone sampling bias in surveying disability. Public Opinion Quarterly 1982; 46: 392-407.
11. Fenig S, Levav I, Kohn R, Yelin N. Telephone vs face-to-face interviewing in a community psychiatric survey. American Journal of Public Health 1993; 83(6): 896-898.
12. Nebot M, Celentano D, Davis A, Davis M, Polacsek M, Santelli J. AIDS and behavioral risk factors in women in inner city Baltimore: A comparison of telephone and face to face surveys. Baltimore: John Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health, 1993.
13. Rogers TF. Interviews by telephone and in person: Quality of responses and field performance. Public Opinion Quarterly 1976; 40: 51-65.
14. Feldman-Naim S, Myers FS, Clark CH, Turner EH, Leibenluft E. Agreement between face-to-face and telephone-administered mood ratings in patients with rapid cycling bipolar disorder. Psychiatry Research 1997; 71: 129-132.
15. Scheier MF, Carver CS. Optimism, coping, and health: Assessment and implications of general outcome expectancies. Health Psychology, 1985; 4: 219-247.
16. Day H, Jutai J. Measuring the Psychosocial Impact of Assistive Devices: The PIADS. Canadian Journal of Rehabilitation 1996; 9(2): 159-168.
17. Carver CS, Scheier MF, Weintraub JK. Assessing coping strategies: A theoretically based approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1989; 56: 267-283.
18. Scheier MF, Carver CS. Effects of optimism on psychological and physical well-being: Theoretical overview and empirical update. Cognitive Therapy and Research 1992; 16: 201-228.
19. Day H, Jutai J, Woolrich W, Strong G. The stability of impact of assistive devices. Disability and Rehabilitation 2001; 23(9): 400-404.
20. Day H, Jutai J, Campbell KA. Development of a scale to measure the psychosocial impact of assistive devices: lessons learned and the road ahead. Disability and Rehabilitation 2002; 24(1/2/3): 31-37.