Measuring autonomy in disabled people: Validation of a new scale in a UK population

Clinical Rehabilitation

Volumn 20, Issue 9, 2006, Pages 793-803

  Sibley, A ^a   Kersten, Paula ^a   Ward, C D ^b   White, B ^b   Mehta, R ^c   George, S ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISABLED PERSON; FEMALE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; POPULATION RESEARCH; QUESTIONNAIRE; RELIABILITY; RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS; SPINAL CORD INJURY; UNITED KINGDOM; VALIDATION PROCESS; VALIDITY; FACTORIAL ANALYSIS; MIDDLE AGED; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; REPRODUCIBILITY; VALIDATION STUDY;

DISABLED PERSONS; FACTOR ANALYSIS, STATISTICAL; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 34250687569     PISSN: 02692155     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0269215506070808     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Pfeiffer D. The paradox of changing the service delivery system in the field of rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil 2001; 23: 16-17.
2. Tennant A. Models of disability: a critical perspective. Disabil Rehabil 1997; 19: 478-79.
3. World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF. World Health Organization, 2001.
4. Bornman J. The World Health Organisation's terminology and classification: Application to severe disability. Disabil Rehabil 2004; 26: 182-88.
5. McPherson KM, Levack W, Kersten P. A new classification for outcomes in illness and injury. Br J Hosp Med (Lond). 2005; 66: 210-14.
6. Cardol M, de Haan RJ, de Jong BA et al. Psychometric properties of the impact on participation and autonomy questionnaire. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001; 82: 210-16.
7. Cardol M, de Haan RJ, van den Bos GAM et al. The development of a handicap assessment questionnaire: The Impact on Participation and Autonomy (IPA). Clin Rehabil 1999; 13: 411-19.
8. Cardol M, Beelen A, van den Bos GA et al. Responsiveness of the impact on participation and autonomy questionnaire. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002; 83: 1524-29.
9. Cardol M, de Jong BA, van den Bos GAM et al. Beyond disability: perceived participation in people with a chronic disabling condition. Clin Rehabil 2002; 16: 27-35.
10. Verkerk M. A care perspective on coercion and autonomy. Bioethics 1999; 13: 358-68.
11. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F et al. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 2000; 25: 3186-91.
12. Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: the Barthel Index. Md State Med J 1965; 14: 61-65.
13. Kahn R, Goldfarb A, Pollack M et al. Brief objective measures for the determination of mental status in the aged. Am J Psychiatry 1960; 117: 326-28.
14. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales. A practical guide to their development and use, second edition. Oxford University Press, 1995.
15. Flack VF, Afifi AA, Lachenbruch PA et al. Sample size determinations for the two rater kappa statistic. Psychometrika 1988; 53: 321-25.
16. Martin J, Meltzer H, Elliot D. The prevalence of disability among adults. HMSO, 1988.
17. Ware J, Jr., Kosinski M, Dewey JE. How to score version 2 of the SF-36 Health Survey (Standard & Acute Forms). Medical Outcomes Trust and QualiMetric Incorporated, 2000.
18. Harwood RH, Rogers A, Dickinson E et al. Measuring handicap: the London Handicap Scale, a new measure for chronic disease. Qual Health Care 1994; 3: 11-16.
19. Patrick D, Sittampalam Y, Somerville S et al. A cross-cultural comparison of health status values. Am J Public Health 1985; 75: 1402-407.
20. Thompson B. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. American Psychological Association, 2004: 124-30.
21. Bentler PM, Bonnett DG. Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychol Bull 1980; 88: 588-606.
22. Bentler PM. Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychol Bull 1990; 107: 238-46.
23. Cumming G, Finch S. A primer on the understanding, use and calculation of confidence intervals that are based on central and noncentral distributions. Educ Psychol Meas 2001; 61: 532-75.
24. Statistically based tests for the number of common factors. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychometric Society, Iowa City, 1980.
25. Altman DG. Some common problems in medical research. In Altman DG ed. Practical statistics for medical research, first edition. Chapman & Hall.
26. Vazirinejad R, Lilley JM, Ward CD. The 'Impact of Participation and Autonomy': Acceptability of the English version in a multiple sclerosis outpatient setting. Mult Scler 2003; 9: 612-15.
27. Collopy BJ. Autonomy and long term care: some crucial distinctions. Gerontologist 1988; 28: 10-17.
28. Larsson Lund M, Nordlund A, Nygard L et al. Perceptions of participation and predictors of perceived problems with participation in persons with spinal cord injury. J Rehabil Med 2004; 36: 1-6.
29. Department of Health. The expert patient: a new approach to chronic disease management for the 21st century, 2001. Accessed from www.dh.gov.uk
30. Department of Health. The national service framework (NSF) for long-term conditions, 2005. Accessed from www.dh.gov.uk
31. Lothian K, Philp I. Care of older people: Maintaining the dignity and autonomy of older people in the healthcare setting. BMJ 2001; 322: 668-70.
32. Malouf P, Paulus F. Maintaining older people's dignity and autonomy in healthcare settings. BMJ 2001; 323: 340.