Co-constructing engagement in pediatric rehabilitation: a multiple case study approach

References

• King G, Chiarello LA, Ideishi R, et al. The complexities and synergies of engagement: an ethnographic study of engagement in outpatient pediatric rehabilitation sessions. Disabil Rehabil. 2019. DOI:10.1080/09638288.2019.1700562
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King G, Chiarello LA, Ideishi R, et al. The nature, value, and experience of engagement in pediatric rehabilitation: perspectives of youth, caregivers, and service providers. Dev Neurorehabil. 2020;23(1):18–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bright FAS, Kayes NM, Worrall L, et al. A conceptual review of engagement in healthcare and rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil. 2015;37(8):643–654.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melvin K, Meyer C, Scarinci N. What does “engagement” mean in early speech pathology intervention? A qualitative systematised review. Disabil Rehabil. 2020;42(18):2665–2678.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King G, Currie M, Petersen P. Child and parent engagement in the mental health intervention process: a motivational framework. Child Adolesc Ment Health. 2014;19(1):2–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King G, Baldwin P, Servais M, et al. Exploring relational dialogue in solution-focused coaching sessions: an analysis of co-construction and reflection. Dev Neurorehabil. 2020;23(6):390–401.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crepeau EB. “I need someone to keep an eye on me”: the power of attention in patient-practitioner interactions. Disabil Rehabil. 2016;38(24):2419–2427.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bavelas JB, Coates L, Johnson T. Listener responses as a collaborative process: the role of gaze. J Commun. 2002;52(3):566–580.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwellnus H, Seko Y, King G, et al. Solution-focused coaching in pediatric rehabilitation: perceived therapist impact. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr. 2020;40(3):263–278.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D’Arrigo R, Copley JA, Poulsen AA, et al. Parent engagement and disengagement in paediatric settings: an occupational therapy perspective. Disab Rehabil. 2020;42(20):2882–2812.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D’Arrigo RG, Copley JA, Poulsen AA, et al. Strategies occupational therapists use to engage children and parents in therapy sessions. Aust J Occup Ther. 2020;67(6):537–549.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melvin K, Meyer C, Scarinci N. What does a family who is “engaged” in early intervention look like? Perspectives of Australian speech-language pathologists. Int J Speech-Lang Pathol. 2020. DOI:10.1080/17549507.2020.1784279
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klatte IS, Harding S, Roulstone S. Speech and language therapists’ views on parents’ engagement in Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT). ).Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2019;54(4):553–564.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King G, Imms C, Stewart D, et al. A transactional framework for pediatric rehabilitation: shifting the focus to situated contexts, transactional processes, and adaptive developmental outcomes. Disabil Rehabil. 2018;40(15):1829–1841.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawlor MC. The particularities of engagement: intersubjectivity in occupational therapy practice. Occup Partic Health. 2012;32(4):151–159.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bright FA, Kayes NM, Cummins C, et al. Co-constructing engagement in stroke rehabilitation: a qualitative study exploring how practitioner engagement can influence patient engagement. Clin Rehabil. 2017;31(10):1396–1405.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King G, Chiarello LA, Thompson L, et al. Development of an observational measure of therapy engagement for pediatric rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil. 2019;41(1):86–97.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King G, Schwellnus H, Keenan S, et al. Youth engagement in pediatric rehabilitation: service providers’ perceptions in a real-time study of solution-focused coaching for participation goals. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr. 2018;38(5):527–547.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King G, Keenan S, McDougall C, et al. Investigating a participation-based friendship intervention for youth with disabilities: effects on goal attainment, social self-efficacy, and engagement. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr. 2020;40(2):152–167.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fine MA, Kurdek LA. Publishing multiple journal articles from a single data set: issues and recommendations. J Family Psychol. 1994;8(4):371–379.
   Google Scholar
• Yin RK. Case study research: design and methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Baxter P, Jack S. Qualitative case study methodology: study design and implementation for novice researchers. Qualitat Report. 2008;13(4):544–559.
   Google Scholar
• Ebneyamini S, Sadeghi Moghadam MR. Toward developing a framework for conducting case study research. Int J Qual Methods. 2018;17(1):160940691881795.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandelowski M. Sample size in qualitative research. Res Nurs Health. 1995;18(2):179–183.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morrison TL, Smith JD. Working alliance development in occupational therapy: a cross-case analysis. Aust Occup Ther J. 2013;60(5):326–333.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernhardt IS, Nissen-Lie HA, Råbu M. The embodied listener: a dyadic case study of how therapist and patient reflect on the significance of therapist’s personal presence for the therapeutic change process. Psychother Res. 2020. DOI:10.1080/10503307.2020.1808728
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Onwuegbuzie AJ, Collins KMT. A typology of mixed methods sampling designs in social science research. Qual Rep. 2007;12(2):281–316.
   Google Scholar
• Pulakos ED. The development of training programs to increase accuracy with different rating tasks. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1986;38(1):76–91.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quinn C, Clare L, McGuinness T, et al. Negotiating the balance: the triadic relationship between spousal caregivers, people with dementia and Admiral Nurses. Dementia. 2013;12(5):588–605.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101.
   Google Scholar
• Braun V, Clarke V. Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qual Res Sport Exerc Health. 2019;11(4):589–597.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tracy SJ. Qualitative quality: eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qual Inq. 2010;16(10):837–851.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenbaum P, King S, Law M, et al. Family-centred service: a conceptual framework and research review. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr. 1998;18(1):1–20.
   Google Scholar
• Beach MC, Inui T. Relationship-centered care: a constructive reframing. J Gen Intern Med. 2006;21(S1):S3–S8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King G. A relational goal-oriented model of optimal service delivery to children and families. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr. 2009;29(4):384–408.
   Google Scholar
• Graham F, Rodger S, Ziviani J, et al. Strategies identified as effective by mothers during occupational performance coaching. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr. 2016;36(3):247–213.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Firestone WA. Alternative arguments for generalizing from data as applied to qualitative research. Educ Res. 1993;22(4):16–23.
   Google Scholar
• Polit DF, Beck CT. Generalization in quantitative and qualitative research: myths and strategies. Int J Nurs Stud. 2010;47(11):1451–1458.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King G, Granlund M, Imms C. Measuring participation as a means: participation as a transactional system and a process. In: Imms C, Green D, editors. Participation: optimising outcomes in childhood-onset neurodisability. London (UK): MacKeith Press; 2020. p. 143–160.
   Google Scholar
• Rauthmann JF. Structuring situational information: a road map of the multiple pathways to different situational taxonomies. Eur Psychol. 2015;20(3):176–189.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King G, Desmarais C, Lindsay S, et al. The roles of effective communication and client engagement in delivering culturally sensitive care to immigrant parents of children with disabilities. Disabil Rehabil. 2015;37(15):1372–1381.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pozniak K, King G. Bringing an ethnographic sensibility to pediatric rehabiliation: contributions, limits, and potential. In: Hayre CM, Muller D, Hackett P, editors. Rehabilitation in practice: ethnographic perspectives. London (UK): Springer Nature; 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Blase K, Fixsen D. Core intervention components: identifying and operationalizing what makes programs work. Washington (DC): ASPE Research Brief. US Department of Health and Human Services. 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Danzl MM, Etter NM, Andreatta RD, et al. Facilitating neurorehabilitation through principles of engagement. J Allied Health. 2012;41(1):35–41.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar