Community integration: conceptualisation and measurement

References

• Carling P J. Return to community: building support systems for people with psychiatric disabilities. Guilford, New York 1995
   Google Scholar
• Gordon W A, Brown M, Bergman A I, Shields R W. Community integration research: an empowerment paradigm. Handbook of applied disability and rehabilitation research, K J Hagglund, A W Heinemann. Springer, New York 2006; 5–23
   Google Scholar
• Kosciulek J F, Merz M. Structural analysis of the consumer-directed theory of empowerment. Rehabil Couns Bull 2001; 44: 209–216
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McColl M A, Carlson P, Johnston J, Minnes P, Shue K, Davis D, Karlovits T. The definition of community integration: perspectives of people with brain injuries. Brain Inj 1998; 12: 15–30
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong Y-LI, Solomon P L. Community integration of persons with psychiatric disabilities in supportive independent housing: a conceptual model and methodological considerations. Ment Health Serv Res 2002; 4: 13–28
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ware N C, Hopper K, Tugenbergm T, Dickey B, Fisher D. Connectedness and citizenship: redefining social integration. Psychiatr Serv 2007; 58: 469–474
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood-Dauphinee S, Opzoomer A, Williams J I, Marchand B, Spitzer W O. Assessment of global function: the reintegration to normal living index. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1988; 69: 583–590
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spitzer W O, Dobson A J, Hall J, Chesterman E, Levi J, Shepherd R, Battista R N, Catchlove B R. Measuring quality of life of cancer patients: concise QL-Index for use by physicians. J Chronic Dis 1981; 34: 585–597
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tooth L R, McKenna K T, Smith M, O'Rourke P K. Reliability of scores between stroke patients and significant others on the reintegration to normal living (RNL) index. Disabil Rehabil 2003; 25: 433–440
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willer B, Rosenthal M, Kreutzer J S, Gordon W A, Rempel R. Assessment of community integration following rehabilitation for traumatic brain injury. J Head Trauma Rehabil 1993; 8: 75–87
   Google Scholar
• Willer B, Ottenbacher K J, Coad M L. The community integration questionnaire: a comprehensive examination. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 1994; 73: 103–111
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whiteneck G G, Charlifue S W, Gerhart K A, Overholser J D, Richardson G N. Quantifying handicap: a new measure of long-term rehabilitation outcomes. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1992; 73: 519–526
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corrigan J D, Deming R. Psychometric characteristics of the community integration questionnaire: replication and extension. J Head Trauma Rehabil 1995; 10: 41–53
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rintala D H, Novy D M, Garza H M, Young M E, High Jr WM, Chiou-Tan F Y. Psychometric properties of a Spanish-language version of the community integration questionnaire (CIQ). Rehabil Psychol 2002; 47: 144–164
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dijkers M. Measuring the long-term outcomes of traumatic brain injury: a review of the community integration questionnaire. J Head Trauma Rehabil 1997; 12: 74–91
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McColl M A, Davies D, Carlson P, Johnston J, Minnes P. The community integration measure: development and preliminary validation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001; 82: 429–434
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaplan C P. The community integration questionnaire with new scoring guidelines: concurrent validity and need for appropriate norms. Brain Inj 2001; 15: 725–731
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cicerone K D, Mott T, Azulay J, Friel J C. Community integration and satisfaction with functioning after intensive rehabilitation for traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004; 85: 943–950
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berry J W. An ecological perspective on cultural and ethnic psychology. Human diversity: perspectives on people in context, E J Trickett, R J Watts, D Birman. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA 1993; 115–141
   Google Scholar
• Buell M K, Minnes P. An acculturation perspective on deinstitutionalization, normalization and service delivery. J Dev Disabil 1994; 3: 94–107
   Google Scholar
• Minnes P, Buell K, Feldman M A, McColl M A, McCreary B. Community integration as acculturation: preliminary validation of the AIMS Interview. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil 2002; 15: 377–387
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Minnes P, Buell K, Nolte M L, McColl M A, Carlson P, Johnston J. Defining community integration of persons with brain injuries as acculturation: a Canadian perspective. NeuroRehabil 2001; 16: 3–10
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Minnes P, Carlson P, McColl M A, Nolte M L, Johnston J, Buell K. Community integration: a useful construct, but what does it really mean?. Brain Inj 2003; 17: 149–159
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buell M K. Integration as acculturation: developmental disability, deinstitutionalization, and service delivery implications. Int Rev Res Ment Retard 2003; 26: 221–260
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flynn R J, Aubry T D. Integration of persons with developmental or psychiatric disabilities: conceptualisation and measurements. A quarter-century of normalization and social role valorization: evolution and impact, R J Flynn, R A Lemay. University of Ottawa Press, Ottawa, ON 1999; 271–303
   Google Scholar
• Wolfensberger W, Tullman S. A brief outline of the principle of normalization. Rehabil Psychol 1982; 27: 131–145
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfensberger W, Thomas S. PASSING (Program Analysis of Service Systems' Implementation of Normalization Goals): normalization criteria and ratings manual2nd ed. National Institute on Mental Retardation, Toronto, ON 1983
   Google Scholar
• Flynn R J. A comprehensive review of research conducted with the program evaluation instruments PASS and PASSING. A quarter-century of normalization and social role valorization: evolution and impact, R J Flynn, R A Lemay. University of Ottawa Press, Ottawa, ON 1999; 317–349
   Google Scholar
• US Department of Education. National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) long range plan for fiscal years 1999–2003, Electronic Citation. http://www.ncddr.org/new/announcements/nidrr_lrp/index.html. Last accessed March 2005
   Google Scholar
• Trigg R, Wood V A, Langton R Hewer. Social reintegration after stroke: the first stages in the development of the subjective index of physical and social outcome (SIPSO). Clin Rehabil 1999; 13: 341–353
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trigg R, Wood V A. The subjective index of physical and social outcome (SIPSO): a new measure for use with stroke patients. Clin Rehabil 2000; 14: 288–299
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trigg R, Wood V A. The validation of the subjective index of physical and social outcome (SIPSO). Clin Rehabil 2003; 17: 283–289
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sneeuw K C, Aaronson N K, de Haan R J, Limburg M. Assessing quality of life after stroke: the value and limitations of proxy ratings. Stroke 1997; 28: 1541–1549
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown M, Dijkers M PJM, Gordon W A, Ashman T, Charatz H, Cheng Z. Participation objective, participation subjective: a measure of participation combining outside and insider perspectives. J Head Trauma Rehabil 2004; 19: 459–481
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. International classification of functioning, disability and heath, ICF. WHO, GenevaSwitzerland 2001
   Google Scholar
• Cohen S, Underwood L G, Gottlieb B H. Social support measurement and intervention: a guide for health and social scientists. Oxford University Press, New York 2000
   Google Scholar
• Brissette I, Cohen S, Seeman T E. Measuring social integration and social networks. Social support measurement and intervention: a guide for health and social scientists, S Cohen, L G Underwood, B H Gottlieb. Oxford University Press, New York 2000; 53–85
   Google Scholar
• Cohen S. Social supports and physical health: symptoms, health behaviors, and infectious disease. Life-span perspectives on stress and coping, A L Greene, E M Cummings, K H Karraker. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ 1991; 213–234
   Google Scholar
• House J S, Robbins C, Metzner H L. The association of social relationships and activities with mortality: prospective evidence from the Techumseh community health study. Am J Epidemiol 1982; 116: 123–140
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heinemann A W. Putting outcome measurement in context: a rehabilitation psychology perspective. Rehabil Psychol 2005; 50: 6–14
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanson B S, Isacsson S O, Janzon L, Lindell S-E, Rastam L. Social anchorage and blood pressure in elderly men. J Hypertens 1988; 5: 503–510
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanson B S, Isacsson S O, Janzon L, Lindell S-E. Social network and social support influence mortality in elderly men: prospective population study of men born in Malmö, Sweden. Am J Epidemiol 1989; 130: 100–111
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buckner J C. The development of an instrument to measure neighborhood cohesion. Am J Community Psychol 1988; 16: 771–791
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perkins D D, Florin P, Rich R C, Wandersman A, Chavis D M. Participation and the social and physical environment of residential blocks: crime and community context. Am J Community Psychol 1990; 18: 83–115
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pledger C. A new model of disability [Special section]. Am Psychol 2003; 58: 279–312
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tate D G, Pledger C. An integrative conceptual framework of disability: new directions for research. Am Psychol 2003; 58: 289–295
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tate D G. Hospital to community: changes in practice and outcomes. Rehabil Psychol 2001; 46: 125–138
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olkin R, Pledger C. Can disability studies and psychology join hands?. Am Psychol 2003; 58: 296–304
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zimmerman M A, Warschausky S. Empowerment theory for rehabilitation research: conceptual and methodological issuers. Rehabil Psychol 1998; 43: 3–16
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeJong G. Independent living: from social movement to analytic paradigm. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1979; 60: 435–446
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shinn M, Toohey S M. Community contexts of human welfare. Annu Rev Psychol 2003; 54: 427–459
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perkins R, Repper J. Working alongside people with long term mental health problems. Chapman & Hall, London 1996
   Google Scholar