A method for selection of appropriate assistive technology for computer access

International Journal of Rehabilitation Research

Volumn 33, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 298-305

  Jenko, Mojca ^a   Matjačic, Zlatko ^a   Vidmar, Gaj ^a   Bešter, Janez ^b   Pogačnik, Matevž ^b   Zupan, Anton ^a  

^a University Rehabilitation Institute   (Slovenia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA   (Slovenia)

Author keywords

Agreement; Assistive technology; Clinical judgment; Computer access; Learning curve

Indexed keywords

AGREEMENT; ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY; CLINICAL JUDGMENT; COMPUTER ACCESS; LEARNING CURVE;

DISEASE CONTROL; ENGINEERING EDUCATION; RATING; TECHNOLOGY; USER INTERFACES;

HANDICAPPED PERSONS;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; CHILD; CLASSIFICATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER; COMPUTER INTERFACE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; COOPERATION; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; DISABILITY; DISABLED PERSON; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION; INTERDISCIPLINARY COMMUNICATION; INTERNET; LEARNING; LEARNING CURVE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEUROMUSCULAR DISEASE; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; SELF HELP;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; CHILD; COMPUTER LITERACY; COMPUTER PERIPHERALS; COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; DISABILITY EVALUATION; DISABLED PERSONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERDISCIPLINARY COMMUNICATION; INTERNET; LEARNING CURVE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEUROMUSCULAR DISEASES; PRACTICE (PSYCHOLOGY); PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; SELF-HELP DEVICES; SOFTWARE DESIGN; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79951508433     PISSN: 03425282     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MRR.0b013e3283375e35     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. BeENABLED (2009). On-Screen Keyboard beKEY. Available at: http://www.be-enabled.de/
2. Brooke MH, Griggs RC, Mendell JR, Fenichel GM, Shumate JB, Pellegrino RJ (1981). Clinical trial in Duchenne dystrophy. I. The design of the protocol. Muscle Nerve 4:186-197. (Pubitemid 11098499)
3. Cohen J (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas 20:37-46.
4. Cunningham C, Coombs N (1997). Information access and adaptive technology. Phoenix: ORYX Press.
5. Drescher PL (2009). Assistive technology for access to computers. In: Gierach J, editor. Assessing students' needs for assistive technology: a resource manual for school district teams. 5th ed. Milton, WI: WATI; pp. 1-23.
6. Friendly M (2000). Visualizing categorical data. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.
7. Grill E, Mansmann U, Cieza A, Stucki G (2007). Assessing observer agreement when describing and classifying functioning with the international classification of functioning, disability and health. J Rehabil Med 39:71-76.
8. LOMAK (2009). Light Operated Mouse and Keyboard. Available at: http://guides.lomakkeyboard.com/en/index.html
9. McGraw KO, Wong SP (1996). Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychol Meth 1:30-46. (Pubitemid 126421252)
10. R Development Core Team (2009). R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
11. Raggi A, Leonardi M (2009). Assessing activity limitations in patients with neuromuscular diseases: is the ACTIVLIM questionnaire linked to ICF and ICF-CY? Int J Rehabil Res 32:148-153.
12. Scherer MJ (2001). Assistive technology: matching device and consumer successful rehabilitation. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
13. Svensson E, Holm S (1994). Separation of systematic and random differences in ordinal rating scales. Stat Med 13:2437-2453.
14. Wahl L, Haugen K (2004). Selecting technology. In: Mummery A, editor. Computer resources for people with disabilities: a guide to assistive technologies, tools and resources for people of all age. 4th ed. Alameda: Alliance for Technology Access; pp. 58-89.
15. Zupan A (1996). Assessment of the functional abilities of the upper limbs in patients with neuromuscular diseases. Disabil Rehabil 18:69-75. (Pubitemid 26115999)