Beyond traditional notions of validity: Selecting appropriate measures for occupational therapy practice

Australian Occupational Therapy Journal

Volumn 59, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 243-246

  Zur, Briana ^a   Johnson, Andrew ^a   Roy, Eric ^b   Laliberte Rudman, Debbie ^a   Wells, Jennie ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Assessment; Consequential validity; Evidence based practice; Measurement; Occupational competence; Occupational performance

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE; OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY; QUALITY CONTROL; REPRODUCIBILITY; STANDARD; STATISTICS; UNITED STATES; VALIDATION STUDY;

BENCHMARKING; EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE; HUMANS; OCCUPATIONAL DISEASES; OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY; PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE PATTERNS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; UNITED STATES; VALIDATION STUDIES AS TOPIC;

EID: 84862333930     PISSN: 00450766     EISSN: 14401630     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1630.2012.01007.x     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Benson, J. & Schell, B. (1997). Measurement theory: Application to occupational and physical therapy. In: J. Van Deusen & D. Brunt (Eds.), Assessment in occupational therapy and physical therapy (pp. 3-24). Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Company.
2. Coster, W. (2006). Evaluating the use of assessments in practice and research. In: G. Kielhofner (Ed.), Research in occupational therapy: Methods of inquiry for enhancing practice. Philadelphia: F.A. Davis Company.
3. Coster, W. (2008). Embracing ambiguity: Facing the challenge of measurement. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 62 (6), 743-751.
4. Kielhofner, G. (2006). Research in occupational therapy: Methods of inquiry for enhancing practice. Philadelphia: F.A. Davis Company.
5. Law, M. (1987). Measurement in occupational therapy: Scientific criteria for evaluation. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 54 (3), 133-138.
6. Law, M. & Baum, C. (1998). Evidence-based occupational therapy. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 65 (3), 131-135.
7. Law, M., Baum, C. & Dunn, W. (2005). Measuring occupational therapy performance: Supporting best practice. Thorofare, New Jersey: Slack.
8. Messick, S. (1975). The standard problem: Meaning and values in measurement and evaluation. American Psychologist, 30, 955-966.
9. Messick, S. (1989a). Meaning and values in test validation: The science and ethics of assessment. Educational Researcher, 18 (2), 5-11.
10. Messick, S. (1989b). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13-103). New York: MacMillan.
11. Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from person's responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50, 741-749.
12. Michell, J. (1986). Measurement scales and statistics: A clash of paradigms. Psychological Bulletin, 100 (3), 398-407.
13. Miller Polgar, J. (2009). Critiquing assessments. In: E. Blesedell Crepeau, E. S. Cohn & B. A. Boty Schell (Eds.), Willard and spackman's occupational therapy (pp. 519-536). Philadelphia: Lippencott Williams & Wilkins.
14. Sechrest, L. (2005). Validity of measures is no simple matter. Health Research and Educational Trust, 40 (5), 1584-1604.
15. Streiner, D. L. & Norman, G. R. (2008). Health measurement scales: A practical guide to their development and use (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.