Refine
Year of publication
- 2010 (3) (remove)
Document Type
Language
- English (3)
Has Fulltext
- no (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
- Consensus method (1)
- Contextual factors (1)
- Descriptive (1)
- Disability and health (1)
- Epistemic community (1)
- Evaluation (1)
- Evidence base (1)
- ICF (1)
- Knowledge base (1)
- Knowledge development (1)
- Patient perspective (1)
- sociology of knowledge (1)
Purpose: This study aimed to gain knowledge about environmental factors (EFs) that impact work and social life participation of people with multiple sclerosis (MS) in Austria and Switzerland to extend the knowledge of participation and to identify key areas for measuring participation.
Method: A three-round Delphi study was conducted defining patients as experts. In the 1st round, qualitative data was gathered through questionnaires, analyzed with content analysis, and factors were assigned to EFs as classified in the ICF. In the 2nd and 3rd round, experts judged EFs according to its relevance to obtain consensus (cut-off 75%). Categories were ranked on a scale from mostly important to important.
Results: One hundred and twelve Austrian and 109 Swiss experts were recruited. The content analysis revealed 768 EFs. The study resulted in a list of 176 consensus factors for Austria and 177 Switzerland. Five categories revealed to be highly important, 12 moderately important, 6 fairly important, and 10 important.
Conclusions: This study indicates that participation in work or social life is influenced by physical, social, attitudinal, and policy factors. Consensus factors afford insights into areas for consideration in the development of participation outcome measurements and support a comprehensive and inclusive rehabilitation approach.
Objectives: A historical review of the editorial board and the founding editor of WORK: A Journal of Prevention, Assessment and Rehabilitation was conducted to examine the understanding of the editorship and contributions of this team to the knowledge in WORK.
Participants: The team of four authors worked together to identify an approach to evaluate the contributions and impact of WORK's editorial board (EB) on the journal's scholarship. The editor-in-chief (EIC) and editorial board members were participants in this evaluation.
Methods: Informative and formative evaluations were used to investigate how knowledge was shaped through the development of an epistemic community of scholars in the field of work. Metrics of the EB composition and participation in the journal as well as surveys and interviews with the board and the editor-in-chief were analyzed.
Results: The EB represents an international community of scholars with a common interest in work and who contribute academically both within WORK and beyond. The epistemic community that has evolved through the editorial board represents a pluralistic perspective on work that is needed to inform practice, and knowledge.
Conclusion: Future directions to continue to advance knowledge through WORK's editorial board and EIC are elaborated.
Introduction: The aim of this review was to gain an understanding of the first 20 years of contributions to WORK within the assessment domain and to reflect on the perspectives underscoring this knowledge base.
Method: A narrative review of assessment articles using the WORK ARTicle database was conducted. Assessment articles were searched using issues from 1990 to 2009. Descriptive data was analyzed to examine historical trends of the specific types and dimensions of articles, the regional location of the contributions, and the methodological accordance. A reflective process was used by an editorial board member of WORK to inductively interpret perspectives and contextual issues that underpinned the evolution of the assessment domain in WORK.
Results: Over half of N= 108 of the articles on assessment in WORK focused on establishing or reporting reliability and validity of assessments used in clinical practice or evaluation research. The majority of the assessment articles were predominantly focused on the person. Contributions of articles were from 5 regions: North America, Europe, Australia, Asia and Africa.
Conclusions: Assessment articles in WORK have contributed to the development of evidence to support assessment of the worker. These articles represent a knowledge base that emphasizes evidence-based assessments to evaluate what a person can and cannot do to participate in work. Efforts are needed to expand knowledge generation in assessment to include more evaluations on the workplace and occupation dimensions, and that also considers the worker in context.