Test-Retest Reliability and Cross Validation of the Functioning Everyday With a Wheelchair Instrument
ABSTRACT The purpose of this study was to establish the test-retest reliability and content validity of an outcomes tool designed to measure the effectiveness of seating-mobility interventions on the functional performance of individuals who use wheelchairs or scooters as their primary seating-mobility device. The instrument, Functioning Everyday With a Wheelchair (FEW), is a questionnaire designed to measure perceived user function related to wheelchair/scooter use. Using consumer-generated items, FEW Beta Version 1.0 was developed and test-retest reliability was established. Cross-validation of FEW Beta Version 1.0 was then carried out with five samples of seating-mobility users to establish content validity. Based on the content validity study, FEW Version 2.0 was developed and administered to seating-mobility consumers to examine its test-retest reliability. FEW Beta Version 1.0 yielded an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) Model (3,k) of .92, p < .001, and the content validity results revealed that FEW Beta Version 1.0 captured 55% of seating-mobility goals reported by consumers across five samples. FEW Version 2.0 yielded ICC(3,k) = .86, p < .001, and captured 98.5% of consumers' seating-mobility goals. The cross-validation study identified new categories of seating-mobility goals for inclusion in FEW Version 2.0, and the content validity of FEW Version 2.0 was confirmed. FEW Beta Version 1.0 and FEW Version 2.0 were highly stable in their measurement of participants' seating-mobility goals over a 1-week interval.
Article: READING STATISTICS AND RESEARCH[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The book demonstrates the best and most conservative ways to decipher and critique research reports particularly for social science researchers. In addition, new editions of the book are always better organized, effectively structured and meticulously updated in line with the developments in the field of research statistics. Even the most trivial issues are revisited and updated in new editions. For instance, purchaser of the previous editions might check the interpretation of skewness and kurtosis indices in the third edition (p. 34) and in the fifth edition (p.29) to see how the author revisits every single detail. Theory and practice always go hand in hand in all editions of the book. Re-reading previous editions (e.g. third edition) before reading the fifth edition gives the impression that the author never stops ameliorating his instructional text writing methods. In brief, “Reading Statistics and Research” is among the best sources showing research consumers how to understand and critically assess the statistical information and research results contained in technical research reports. In this respect, the review written by Mirko Savić in Panoeconomicus (2008, 2, pp. 249-252) will help the readers to get a more detailed overview of each chapters. I cordially urge the beginning researchers to pick a highlighter to conduct a detailed reading with the book. A thorough reading of the source will make the researchers quite selective in appreciating the harmony between the data analysis, results and discussion sections of typical journal articles. If interested, beginning researchers might begin with this book to grasp the basics of research statistics, and prop up their critical research reading skills with some statistics package applications through the help of Dr. Andy Field’s book, Discovering Statistics using SPSS (second edition) published by Sage in 2005.The Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education. 01/2008;
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to evaluate user satisfaction with wheelchair seating aids. A modified version of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology (QUEST) was used to assess satisfaction of 24 subjects who owned a modular-type seating device integrated in a powered wheelchair. The results of this QUEST-based approach revealed that the variable comfort was identified as the most important consumer criterion yet it was evaluated as the least satisfying. There were statistically significant (p < 0.05) gender differences in the degree of importance and the degree of satisfaction scored on several variables as well as significant differences between subjects living at home and subjects living in institutions. The results support the value of consumer opinion and challenge the assumptions of assistive technology professionals. This study underscores the appropriateness of assessing consumer satisfaction in a systematic and ecologically valid manner.Assistive Technology - ASSIST TECHNOL. 01/1999; 11(1):43-53.
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To investigate the measurement properties of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology (QUEST 2.0) with respect to test-retest stability, alternate form reliability, construct validity and applicability. Data on satisfaction and quality of life impacts of mobility devices were obtained from 81 community-based adults with Multiple Sclerosis, using the QUEST 2.0 and the Psychosocial Impact of Assistive Devices Scale (PIADS). Subjects were assigned to four groups and a second QUEST 2.0 was administered one week later. Groups differed with respect to the format and the order in which alternate forms were presented. Measures of association were calculated between QUEST 2.0 and PIADS (n = 81) and between QUEST 2.0 alternate forms (n = 48). Respondents' reactions were considered. The device subscale, services subscale, and total QUEST 2.0 scores achieved good test-retest stability (ICC 0.82, 0.82, 0.91). Alternate-form equivalence (ICC 0.89, 0.76, 0.91) was lower for services. The positive correlations between QUEST 2.0 and the three PIADS dimensions were fair to moderate for device and total QUEST 2.0 (r(p) 0.34 to 0.45) and fair with services (r(p) 0.27 to 0.30). The tool was positively received, with some restrictions for the services subscale. These findings on the psychometric properties of the QUEST 2.0 reinforce the relevance of the device subscale as an important outcome measure for assistive technology MS users. Further assessment of the services subscale is needed.Disability and Rehabilitation 01/2002; 24(1-3):21-30. · 1.54 Impact Factor