On "Prospective evaluation of the AM-PAC-CAT..." Jette et al. Phys Ther. 2007;87:385-398 [1]

Physical Therapy

Volumn 87, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 609-611

  Hart, Dennis L ^a  

^a Focus on Therapeutic Outcomes Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTERIZED ADAPTIVE TESTING; FUNCTIONAL STATUS; LETTER; OUTPATIENT; PEER REVIEW; PHYSICAL MOBILITY; PHYSIOTHERAPY; REHABILITATION; SHORT FORM 36;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; AMBULATORY CARE; COMPUTERS; DISABILITY EVALUATION; HUMANS; PHYSICAL THERAPY MODALITIES; PSYCHOMETRICS; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 34247557420     PISSN: 00319023     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2522/ptj.2007.87.5.609     Document Type: Letter

References (16)

1. Hart DL, Connolly JB. Pay-for-Performance for Physical Therapy and Occupational Therapy: Medicare Part B Services. Grant #18-P-93066/9-01: Health & Human Services/Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services; 2006.
2. Jette AM, Haley SM, Tao W, et al. Prospective evaluation of the AM-PAC-CAT in outpatient rehabilitation settings. Phys Ther. 2007;87:385-398.
3. Wainer H, ed. Computerized Adaptive Testing. A Primer. 2nd ed. Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2000.
4. Crane PK, Hart DL, Gibbons LE, Cook KF. A 37-item shoulder functional status item pool had negligible differential item functioning. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59:478-484.
5. Hart DL, Mioduski JE, Stratford PW. Simulated computerized adaptive tests for measuring functional status were efficient with good discriminant validity in patients with hip, knee, or foot/ankle impairments. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58:629-638.
6. Hart DL. Assessment of unidimensionality of physical functioning in patients receiving therapy in acute, orthopedic outpatient centers. J Outcome Meas. 2000;4:413-430.
7. Hart DL, Cook KF, Mioduski JE, et al. Simulated computerized adaptive test for patients with shoulder impairments was efficient and produced valid measures of function. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59:290-298.
8. Hart DL, Mioduski JE, Werneke MW, Stratford PW. Simulated computerized adaptive test for patients with lumbar spine impairments was efficient and produced valid measures of function. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59:947-956.
9. Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36), I: conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30:473-483.
10. Haley SM, Coster WJ, Andres PL, et al. Activity outcome measurement for post-acute care. Med Care. 2004;42(1 suppl): I49-I61.
11. Stout WF. A new item response theory modeling approach with applications to unidimensionality assessment and ability estimation. Psychometrika. 1990;55:293-325.
12. Porter ME, Teisberg EO. Redefining Health Care. Creating Value-Based Competition on Results. Boston, Mass: Havard Business School Press; 2006.
13. Stratford PW, Riddle DL. Assessing sensitivity to change: choosing the appropriate change coefficient. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2005;3:23.
14. Waddell G, Newton M, Henderson I, et al. A Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) and the role of fear-avoidance beliefs in chronic low back pain and disability. Pain. 1993;52:157-168.
15. Institute of Medicine. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2001.
16. Institute of Medicine. Rewarding Provider Performance: Aligning Incentives in Medicare. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2006.