87
Views
13
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

Inter-Rater Agreement Using the Instrumental Activity Measure

, &
Pages 33-38 | Published online: 12 Jul 2009

References

  • van Herk IEH, Arendzen JH. Measures to assess func- tional capacities of stroke patients living at home: a review of the literature. J Rehabil Sci 1995; 8: 66–71.
  • Lewinter M, Mikkelsen S. Therapists and the rehabili- tation process after stroke. Disabil Rehabil 1995; 17: 211–216.
  • Wade DT. Measurement in neurological rehabilitation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992.
  • Grimby G, Andren E, Daving Y, Wright B. Depen- dence and perceived difficulty in daily activities in community-living stroke survivors 2 years after stroke: a study of instrumental structures. Stroke 1998; 29: 1843–1849.
  • Corr S, Bayer A. Poor functional status of stroke patients after hospital discharge: scope for interven- tion? Br J Occup Ther 1992; 55: 383–385.
  • Elmsta°hl S, Sommer M, Hagberg B. A 3 year follow up of stroke patients: relationships between activities of daily living and personality characteristics. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 1996; 22: 233–244.
  • Lindmark B, Hamrin E. A five-year follow-up of stroke survivors: motor function and activities of daily living. Clin Rehabil 1995; 9: 1–9.
  • Hamilton BB, Granger CV, et al. A uniform national system for medical rehabilitation. In: Fuhrer MJ editor. Rehabilitation outcomes: analysis and measurement. Baltimore: Brookes, 1987: 137 –147.
  • Grimby G, Andren E, Holmgren E, Wright B, Linacre JM, Sund W. Structure of a combination of functional independence measure and instrumental activity mea- sure items in community-living persons: a study of individuals with cerebral palsy and spina bifida. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1996; 77: 1109–1114.
  • Svensson E. Analysis of systematic and random differ- ences between paired ordinal categorical data [thesis]. Gothenburg: Gothenburg University; 1993.
  • Polit D, Hungler B. Nursing research, principles and methods. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Company, 1983.; 382 –408
  • Nachmias C, Nachmias D. Research methods in the social science. 2nd ed. New York: St Martins Press, 1981.
  • Johnston MV, Keith RA, Hinderer SR. Measurement standards for interdisciplinary medical rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1992; 73 Suppl: 3 –23.
  • Smith RO. The science of occupational therapy assess- ment. Occup Ther J Res 1992; 12: 3–15.
  • Fisher A. Functional Measures, part 1: What is func- tion. What should we measure, and how should we measure it? Am J Occup Ther 1992; 46: 183–185.
  • Smith D, Clark MS. Competence and performance in activities of daily living of patients following rehabilita- tion from stroke. Disabil Rehabil 1995; 17: 15–23.
  • Eakin P. Problems with assessments of activities of daily living. Br J Occup Ther 1989; 52: 50–54.
  • McDowell I, Newell C. Measuring health; a guide to rating scales and questionnaires. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
  • Unsworth CA. The concept of function. Br J Occup Ther 1993; 56: 287–292.
  • Daving Y, Andre´n E, Nordholm L, Grimby G Reliability of an interview approach to Functional Inde- pendence Measure.
  • Guide for the uniform data set for medical rehabilita- tion (adult FIM), version 4.0. Buffalo: State University of New York at Buffalo, 1993.
  • Kazdin AE. Artefact, bias and complexity of assess- ment: the ABCs of reliability. J Appl Behav Anal 1977; 10: 141–150.
  • Svensson E, Starmark J-E, Ekholm S, von Essen C, Johansson A. Analysis of inter-observer disagreement in the assessment of subarachnoid blood and acute hydrocephalus on CT scans. Neurol Res 1996; 18: 487–494.
  • Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas 1960; 20: 37–46.
  • Fleiss JL. Statistical methods for rates and proportion. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1981; 212 –236.
  • Feinstein AR, Cicchetti DV. High agreement but low kappa: I. The problems of two paradoxes. J Clin Epidemiol 1990; 43: 551–558.
  • Ottenbacher KJ, Hsu Y, Granger CV, Fiedler RC. The reliability of the functional independence measure: a quantitative review. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1996; 77: 1226–1232.
  • Avlund K, Schultz-Larsen K, Kreiner S. The measure- ment of instrumental ADL: content validity and con- struct validity. Ageing Clin Exp Res 1993; 5: 371–383..

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.