Optimizing measurement for neurobehavioural rehabilitation services: A multisite comparison study and response to UKROC

References

• Alderman, N. (2003). Contemporary approaches to the management of irritability and aggression following traumatic brain injury. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 13(1–2), 211–240. doi: 10.1080/09602010244000327
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alderman, N., & Knight, C. (2017). Keeping the ‘scientist-practitioner’ model alive and kicking through service-based evaluation and research: Examples from neurobehavioural rehabilitation. The Neuropsychologist, 3, 25–32.
   Google Scholar
• Alderman, N., Williams, C., Knight, C., & Wood, R. L. (2017). Measuring change in symptoms of Neurobehavioural disability: Responsiveness of the St Andrew’s-Swansea Neurobehavioural outcome Scale. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 32(8), 951–962. doi: 10.1093/arclin/acx026
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alderman, N., Williams, C., & Wood, R. L. (2018). When normal scores don’t equate to independence: Recalibrating ratings of neurobehavioural disability from the ‘St Andrew’s – Swansea Neurobehavioural outcome Scale’ to reflect context-dependent support. Brain Injury, 32(2), 218–229. doi: 10.1080/02699052.2017.1406989
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alderman, N., & Wood, R. L. (2013). Neurobehavioural approaches to the rehabilitation of challenging behaviour. NeuroRehabilitation, 32(4), 761–770. doi: 10.3233/NRE-130900
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alderman, N., Wood, R. L., & Williams, C. (2011). The development of the St Andrew’s-Swansea Neurobehavioural outcome scale: Validity and reliability of a new measure of neurobehavioural disability and social handicap. Brain Injury, 25(1), 83–100. doi: 10.3109/02699052.2010.532849
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allen, I. E., & Seaman, C. A. (2007). Likert scales and data analyses. Quality Progress. Retrieved from http://asq.org/quality-progress/2007/07/statistics/likert-scales-and-data-analyses.html
   Google Scholar
• Boake, C. (1996). Supervision rating scale: A measure of functional outcome from brain injury. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 77(8), 765–772. doi: 10.1016/S0003-9993(96)90254-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coetzer, R., & du Toit, P. L. (2001). HoNOS–ABI; a clinically useful outcome measure? Psychiatric Bulletin, 25(11), 421–422. doi: 10.1192/pb.25.11.421
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eisen, S. V., Ranganathan, G., Seal, P., & Spiro, A. (2007). Measuring clinically meaningful change following mental health treatment. The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, 34(3), 272–289. doi: 10.1007/s11414-007-9066-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feng, C., Wang, H., Lu, N., Chen, T., He, H., Lu, Y., & Tu, X. M. (2014). Log-transformation and its implications for data analysis. Shanghai Archives of Psychiatry, 26(2), 105–109. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-0829.2014.02.009
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fleminger, S., Leigh, E., Eames, P., Langrell, L., Nagraj, R., & Logsdail, S. (2005). HoNOS–ABI: A reliable outcome measure of neuropsychiatric sequelae to brain injury? Psychiatric Bulletin, 29(02), 53–55. doi: 10.1192/pb.29.2.53
   Google Scholar
• Hemphill, J. F. (2003). Interpreting the magnitudes of correlation coefficients. American Psychologist, 58(1), 78–79. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.58.1.78
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelly, G., Brown, S., Todd, J., & Kremer, P. (2008). Challenging behaviour profiles of people with acquired brain injury living in community settings. Brain Injury, 22(6), 457–470. doi: 10.1080/02699050802060647
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King, G., Strachan, D., Tucker, M., Duwyn, B., Desserud, S., & Shillington, M. (2009). The application of a transdisciplinary model for early intervention services. Infants & Young Children, 22(3), 211–223. doi: 10.1097/IYC.0b013e3181abe1c3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kreutzer, J. S., Marwitz, J. H., Seel, R., & Devany Serio, C. (1996). Validation of a neurobehavioral functioning inventory for adults with traumatic brain injury. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 77(2), 116–124. doi: 10.1016/S0003-9993(96)90155-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malec, J. F., Kragness, M., Evans, R. W., Finlay, K. L., Ann, K., & Lezak, M. D. (2003). Further psychometric evaluation and revision of the Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory in a national sample. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 18(6), 479–492. doi: 10.1097/00001199-200311000-00002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malec, J. F., & Lezak, M. D. (2008). Manual for The Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory (MPAI-4) for adults, Children and Adolescents. Test. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2493080468
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Middel, B., & Van Sonderen, E. (2002). Statistical significant change versus relevant or important change in (quasi) experimental design: Some conceptual and methodological problems in estimating magnitude of intervention-related change in health services research. International Journal of Integrated Care, 2(4), doi: 10.5334/ijic.65
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nayar, M., Vanderstay, R., Siegert, R. J., & Turner-Stokes, L. (2016). The UK functional assessment measure (UK FIM + FAM): psychometric evaluation in patients undergoing specialist rehabilitation following a Stroke from the National UK clinical dataset. PLoS One, 11(1), e0147288. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0147288
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norman, G. R., Sloan, J. A., & Wyrwich, K. W. (2003). Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: The remarkable universality of half a standard deviation on JSTOR. Medical Care, 41(5), 582–592.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oddy, M., & Ramos, S. D. S. (2013). The clinical and cost-benefits of investing in neurobehavioural rehabilitation: A multi-centre study. Brain Injury, 27(13–14), 1500–1507. doi: 10.3109/02699052.2013.830332
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rai, S. K., Yazdany, J., Fortin, P. R., & Aviña-Zubieta, J. A. (2015). Approaches for estimating minimal clinically important differences in systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Research & Therapy, 17(1), 143. doi: 10.1186/s13075-015-0658-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reed, K., Boake, C., Caroselli, J. S., Neese, L. E., Becker, C. L., & Scheibel, R. S. (1999). The supervision rating scale (SRS): A program evaluation tool for postacute brain injury rehabilitation. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 14(8), 795–796. doi:10.1093/arclin/14.8.795 doi: 10.1093/arclin/14.8.795a
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skinner, A., & Turner-Stokes, L. (2006). The use of standardized outcome measures in rehabilitation centres in the UK. Clinical Rehabilitation, 20(7), 609–615. doi: 10.1191/0269215506cr981oa
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snowden, R. J., & Gray, N. S. (2010). Helpful and unhelpful risk assessment practices reply. Psychiatric Services, 61, 530–531. doi: 10.1176/ps.2010.61.5.530a
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swan, L., & Alderman, N. (2004). Measuring the relationship between overt aggression and expectations: A methodology for determining clinical outcomes. Brain Injury, 18(2), 143–160. doi: 10.1080/02699050310001596923
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tam, S., McKay, A., Sloan, S., & Ponsford, J. (2015). The experience of challenging behaviours following severe TBI: A family perspective. Brain Injury, 29(7–8), 813–821. doi: 10.3109/02699052.2015.1005134
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tate, R. L. (2010). A compendium of tests, scales, and questionnaires: The practitioner’s guide to measuring outcomes after acquired brain impairment. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Turner-Stokes, L. (2016). The UK rehabilitation outcome collaborative (UKROC) database UKROC database for specialist rehabilitation. Retrieved from https://www.kcl.ac.uk/nursing/departments/cicelysaunders/attachments/UKROC-database-only-brief-outline-Sept-2016-rev2.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Turner-Stokes, L., Nyein, K., & Halliwell, D. (1999). The Northwick Park Care needs assessment (NPCNA): A directly costable outcome measure in rehabilitation. Clinical Rehabilitation, 13(3), 253–267. doi: 10.1191/026921599677787870
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner-Stokes, L., Nyein, K., Turner-Stokes, T., & Gatehouse, C. (1999). The UK FIM + FAM: Development and evaluation. Clinical Rehabilitation, 13(4), 277–287. doi: 10.1191/026921599676896799
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner-Stokes, L., Scott, H., Williams, H., & Siegert, R. (2012). The rehabilitation complexity scale – extended version: Detection of patients with highly complex needs. Disability and Rehabilitation, 34(9), 715–720. doi: 10.3109/09638288.2011.615880
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner-Stokes, L., & Siegert, R. J. (2013). A comprehensive psychometric evaluation of the UK FIM + FAM. Disability and Rehabilitation, 35(22), 1885–1895. doi: 10.3109/09638288.2013.766271
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner-Stokes, L., Tonge, P., Nyein, K., Hunter, M., Nielsona, S., & Robinson, I. (1998). The Northwick Park dependency score (NPDS): a measure of nursing dependency in rehabilitation. Clinical Rehabilitation, 12(4), 304–318. doi: 10.1191/026921598669173600
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner-Stokes, L., Williams, H., Bill, A., Bassett, P., & Sephton, K. (2016). Cost-efficiency of specialist inpatient rehabilitation for working-aged adults with complex neurological disabilities: A multicentre cohort analysis of a national clinical data set. BMJ Open, 6(2), e010238. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010238
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner-Stokes, L., Williams, H., Sephton, K., Rose, H., Harris, S., & Thu, A. (2012). Engaging the hearts and minds of clinicians in outcome measurement – the UK rehabilitation outcomes collaborative approach. Disability and Rehabilitation, 34(22), 1871–1879. doi: 10.3109/09638288.2012.670033
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner-Stokes, L., Williams, H., & Siegert, R. J. (2010). The rehabilitation complexity scale version 2: A clinimetric evaluation in patients with severe complex neurodisability. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 81(2), 146–153. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.2009.173716
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walters, S. J., & Brazier, J. E. (2003). What is the relationship between the minimally important difference and health state utility values? The case of the SF-6D. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 1(1), 4. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-1-4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Warner, R. (2018). Is a Likert scale considered interval, ratio, or nominal? Quora. Retrieved from https://www.quora.com/Is-a-Likert-scale-considered-interval-ratio-or-nominal.
   Google Scholar
• Winkler, D., Unsworth, C., & Sloan, S. (2006). Factors that lead to successful community integration following severe traumatic brain injury. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 21(1), 8–21. doi: 10.1097/00001199-200601000-00002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood, R. L. (1990a). A neurobehavioural paradigm for brain injury rehabilitation. In R. L. Wood (Ed.), Neurobehavioural sequelae of traumatic brain injury (pp. 3–17). London: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Wood, R. L. (1990b). Towards a model of Cognitive rehabilitation. In R. L. Wood & I. Fussey (Eds.), Cognitive rehabilitation in Perspective (pp. 3–26). London: Taylor Francis. doi: 10.4324/9780429490088-2
   Google Scholar
• Wood, R. L., Alderman, N., & Williams, C. (2008). Assessment of neurobehavioural disability: A review of existing measures and recommendations for a comprehensive assessment tool. Brain Injury, 22(12), 905–918. doi: 10.1080/02699050802491271
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood, R. L., McCrea, J. D., Wood, L. M., & Merriman, R. N. (1999). Clinical and cost effectiveness of post-acute neurobehavioural rehabilitation. Brain Injury, 13(2), 69–88. doi: 10.1080/026990599121746
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Worthington, A. D., & Alderman, N. (2017). Neurobehavioural rehabilitation: A Developing paradigm. In T. McMillan & R. L. Wood (Eds.), Neurobehavioural disability and social handicap following traumatic brain injury (2nd ed). London: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Worthington, A. D., Matthews, S., Melia, Y., & Oddy, M. (2006). Cost-benefits associated with social outcome from neurobehavioural rehabilitation. Brain Injury, 20(9), 947–957. doi: 10.1080/02699050600888314
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Worthington, A., Wood, R. L., & McMillan, T. M. (2017). Neurobehavioural disability over the past four decades. In T. McMillan & R. L. Wood (Eds.), Neurobehavioural disability and social handicap following traumatic brain injury (pp. 19–30). London: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ylvisaker, M., Turkstra, L., Coehlo, C., Yorkston, K., Kennedy, M., Sohlberg, M. M., & Avery, J. (2007). Behavioural interventions for children and adults with behaviour disorders after TBI: A systematic review of the evidence. Brain Injury, 21(8), 769–805. doi: 10.1080/02699050701482470
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar