Making use of research: Clinical views on an evaluation of everyday technology use

References

• AGFisher. Occupational therapy intervention process model: a model for planning and implementing top-down, client-centered, and occupation-based interventions. Fort Collins, CO: Three Star Press; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• GKielhofner. A model of human occupation: theory and application. 4th ed. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• DUpton, DStephens, BWilliams, LScurlock-Evans. Occupational therapists’ attitudes, knowledge, and implementation of evidence-based practice: a systematic review of published research. Br J Occup Ther 2014;77:24–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JWenborn. Commentary on: a critique of the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills (AMPS) in mental health practice. Ment Health Occup Ther 2007;12:8–9.
   Google Scholar
• GChard. Adopting the assessment of motor and process skills into practice: therapists’ voices. Br J Occup Ther 2007;70:50–7.
   Google Scholar
• JChard. An investigation into the use of the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills (AMPS) in clinical practice. Br J Occup Ther 2000;63:481–8.
   Google Scholar
• PLEmiliani. Assistive technology (AT) versus mainstream technology (MST): the research perspective. Technol Disabil 2006;18:19–29.
   Google Scholar
• A-HPatomella, AKottorp, LNygård. Design and management features of everyday technology that challenges older adults. Br J Occup Ther 2013;76:390–7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CMalinowsky, LRosenberg, LNygård. An approach to facilitate the readiness of healthcare professionals to support technology use in everyday life for persons with dementia. Scand J Occup Ther 2014;21:199–209.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LRosenberg, LNygård, AKottorp. Everyday Technology Use Questionnaire (ETUQ): psychometric evaluation of a new assessment of competence in technology use. Occup Ther J Res 2009;29:52–62.
   Google Scholar
• BDraper, LFLow, AWithall, VVickland, TWard. Translating dementia research into practice. Int Psychogeriatr 2009;21:S72–80.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JDewey. Experience and education. New York: Collier; 1938.
   Google Scholar
• MCutchin. Using Deweyan philosophy to rename and reframe adaptation-to-environment. Am J Occup Ther 2004;58:303–12.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SDIvanoff, JHultberg. Understanding the multiple realities of everyday life: basic assumptions in focus-group methodology. Scand J Occup Ther 2006;13:125–32.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• HLCohen, MHSandel, CLThomas, TRBarton. Using focus groups as an educational methodology: deconstructing stereotypes and social work practice misconceptions concerning aging and older adults. Educ Geront 2004;30:329–46.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DLMorgan, RAKreuger. Focus group kit (vols 1–6). London: Sage Publications; 1997.
   Google Scholar
• JCorbin, AStrauss. Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1998.
   Google Scholar
• LNygård, MPantzar, BUppgard, AKottorp. Detection of disability in older adults with MCI or Alzheimer’s disease through assessment of perceived difficulty in using everyday technology. Aging Ment Health 2012;16:361–71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MLarsson Lund, LNygård, AKottorp. Perceived difficulty in the use of everyday technology: relationships to everyday functioning in people with acquired brain injury with a special focus on returning to work. Disabil Rehabil 2014; Epub ahead of print.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• MHällgren, LNygård, AKottorp. Technology and everyday functioning in people with intellectual disabilities: a Rasch analysis of the Everyday Technology Use Questionnaire (ETUQ). J Intellect Disabil Res 2011;55:610–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LRosenberg, AKottorp, BWinblad, LNygård. Perceived difficulty in everyday technology use among older adults with or without cognitive deficits. Scand J Occup Ther 2009;16:216–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MHällgren, LNygård, AKottorp. Everyday technology use among people with intellectual disability: relevance, perceived difficulty, and influencing factors. Scand J Occup Ther 2014;21:210–18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AKottorp, LNygård. Development of a short form assessment for everyday technology used with older adults with MCI or Alzheimer’s disease. Expert Rev Neurother 2011;11:647–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MFallahpour, AKottorp, LNygård, MLLund. Perceived difficulty in using everyday technology among persons with acquired brain injury of different severity: a comparison with controls. J Rehabil Med 2014;46:635–41; accepted.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LNygård. Everyday Technology Use Questionnaire (ETUQ). Research version 3. Stockholm: Karolinska Institutet; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• BGGlaser. Theoretical sensitivity: advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press; 1978.
   Google Scholar
• KTörnquist, USonn. ADL-taxonomin – bedömning av aktivitetsförmåga (The ADL taxonomy – evaluation of ADL ability). Swedish ed. Nacka: Förbundet Sveriges Arbetsterapeuter; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• AFisher, BBernspång. Response to: a critique of the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills (AMPS) in mental health practice. Ment Health Occup Ther 2007;12:10–11.
   Google Scholar
• DHitch. A critique of the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills (AMPS) in mental health practice. Ment Health Occup Ther 2007;12:4–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar