CENTENNIAL VISION Children and Youth Instrument Development and Testing Articles Published in the American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 2009–2013: A Content, Methodology, and Instrument Design Review Ted Brown, Helen Bourke-Taylor MeSH TERMS adolescent medicine diagnosis occupational therapy pediatrics reproducibility of results symptom assessment We extracted 35 articles published between January 2009 and September 2013 in the American Journal of Occupational Therapy (AJOT) that focused on children and youth instrument development and testing, summarized study details and traits of the 37 measures reported in them, and then critiqued the measures. Most of the articles contained Level III evidence (one-group nonrandomized and noncontrolled). The most common types of reliability reported in the articles were internal consistency, test–retest reliability, and interrater reliability; the most frequent types of validity reported were discriminant validity and construct validity. Most pediatric assessment tools were designed for school-age children between ages 5 and 12 yr. The two most common purposes for the assessments were reported as descriptive and discriminative. The continued publication of instruments that measure children and youth participation in meaningful occupations and life roles in home, school, and community environments is recommended. Brown, T., & Bourke-Taylor, H. (2014). Centennial Vision—Children and youth instrument development and testing articles published in the American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 2009–2013: A content, methodology, and instrument design review. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 68, e154–e216. http://dx.doi.org/10.5014/ ajot.2014.012237 Ted Brown, PhD, MSc, MPA, OT(C), OTR, is Associate Professor, Undergraduate Course Convener, and Department Postgraduate Coordinator, Department of Occupational Therapy, School of Primary Health Care, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University—Peninsula Campus, Frankston, Victoria 3800, Australia; [email protected]Helen Bourke-Taylor, PhD, MSc, is Senior Lecturer in Occupational Therapy, School of Allied Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne Campus (St Patrick’s), Victoria, Australia; [email protected]T o commemorate the American Occu- pational Therapy Association’s (AOTA’s) 100th anniversary in 2017, the AOTA board of directors endorsed the imple- mentation of the Centennial Vision, which was “designed to be a road map for the future of the profession” (AOTA, 2007a, p. 613). The Centennial Vision challenges the field of occupational therapy to gen- erate high-quality evidence documenting its effectiveness and impact in six pri- mary practice areas: (1) productive aging; (2) rehabilitation, disability, and participa- tion; (3) children and youth; (4) work and industry; (5) health and wellness; and (6) mental health (Corcoran, 2007). Gutman (2008b) articulated that achiev- ing the goals identified in AOTA’s Centen- nial Vision would require adhering to five primary research priorities: (1) providing evidence of the efficacy of occupational therapy practice; (2) testing the reliability and validity of occupational therapy as- sessment instruments; (3) examining the connection between engagement in occu- pation and health and well-being; (4) using fundamental and basic research to explain how disability experiences affect people’s participation in community life; and (5) asking and answering topical questions that will provide insights for the occupational therapy profession’s ongoing development and evolution. “The sagacity of the Cen- tennial Vision is that it has charged the profession to produce research needed to support the efficacy of practice in all major practice areas” (Gutman, 2008a, p. 501). In 2006, AOTA’s Children and Youth Ad Hoc Committee generated a list of 11 research areas they deemed important to inform occupational therapy practice with children and youth (AOTA, 2006) and in turn outlined AOTA’s Centennial Vision for pediatric occupational therapy: e154 September/October 2014, Volume 68, Number 5 Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
63
Embed
CENTENNIAL VISION Children and Youth Instrument ... · ward AOTA’s Centennial Vision goals. They sorted 46 AJOT articles by research type and categorized them into either the ICF–CY
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
CENTENNIAL VISION
Children and Youth Instrument Development and TestingArticles Published in the American Journal of OccupationalTherapy, 2009–2013: A Content, Methodology, andInstrument Design Review
Ted Brown, Helen Bourke-Taylor
MeSH TERMS
� adolescent medicine
� diagnosis
� occupational therapy
� pediatrics
� reproducibility of results
� symptom assessment
We extracted 35 articles published between January 2009 and September 2013 in the American Journal
of Occupational Therapy (AJOT) that focused on children and youth instrument development and testing,
summarized study details and traits of the 37measures reported in them, and then critiqued themeasures. Most
of the articles contained Level III evidence (one-group nonrandomized and noncontrolled). The most common
types of reliability reported in the articles were internal consistency, test–retest reliability, and interrater
reliability; the most frequent types of validity reported were discriminant validity and construct validity. Most
pediatric assessment tools were designed for school-age children between ages 5 and 12 yr. The two most
common purposes for the assessments were reported as descriptive and discriminative. The continued
publication of instruments that measure children and youth participation in meaningful occupations and life
roles in home, school, and community environments is recommended.
Brown, T., & Bourke-Taylor, H. (2014). Centennial Vision—Children and youth instrument development and testing
articles published in the American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 2009–2013: A content, methodology, and
instrument design review. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 68, e154–e216. http://dx.doi.org/10.5014/
ajot.2014.012237
Ted Brown, PhD, MSc, MPA, OT(C), OTR, is
Associate Professor, Undergraduate Course Convener,
and Department Postgraduate Coordinator, Department
of Occupational Therapy, School of Primary Health Care,
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table2.Sum
maryof
Instrumen
tsforChildrenan
dYou
thDescribed
inArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13
Instrument(Article)
Fram
eof
Reference/
TheoreticalorPracticeModel
Pop
ulation/Group;
Perspective;Purpose,U
se,
orIntent
ofInstrument
Descriptionof
Instrument
Adm
inistrationand
Scoring
TimeRequired
Sub
scales
orItem
Categories
Resou
rces
and
Equipm
entRequired
Scoresand
Results
Obtained
AdolescentsandAdults
Coo
rdinationQuestion-
naire(AAC–Q
;Saban,
Ornoy,G
rotto,&Parush,
2012
)
MotorControlandICF,Body
Functions
andStructures
Population:Ado
lescents
andyoun
gadultsbetween
ages
16and35
.
Perspective:Self-repo
rt.
Purpose:T
oidentifyand
investigateDCDinadoles-
centsandadultsage£3
5yr;the
AAC–Q
canenable
agreaterun
derstand
ingof
howDCDinflu
encespar-
ticipationandfunctionin
daily
lifeactivities,infor-
mationthatmay
guidethe
developm
entof
moreef-
fectiveinterventionpro-
gram
sforthisgrou
p.
Consistsof12
items,which
includ
ebasicandinstru-
mentalactivities
ofdaily
living,organizationalskills,
spatialand
temporalorien-
tation,activities
requiring
finemotor
function,
activities
requiringgross
motor
function,and
writing.
•Respo
ndentsareasked
torespondusinga5-point
Likertfrequencyscale.
•Takes<1
0minto
complete.
•Finalscore
ranges
from
12to60,w
ithlowerscores
indicatingbetterm
otorco-
ordinationfunction.
•Singlecompo
sitescore
iscalculated.
•Questionn
aire
•Pen
orpencil
Totalscoreranges
from
12to
60.
Assessm
entof
Children’s
HandSkills
(ACHS;C
hien,
Brown&McD
onald,20
10)
Ecolog
icalandtop-do
wn
assessment
Population:Childrenages
2–12
yr.
Perspective:Observation
based;profession
alscores
performance
onthebasis
ofspecificcriteria.
Purpose:T
oevaluateho
weffectivelychildrenuse
theirhand
swhenengaged
inmeaning
fuloccup
ations
andto
analyzeandrate
children’sactualhand
skill
performance
intheirrele-
vant
environm
ents.
Assesseschildren’shand
useinnaturalistic
settings
viaob
servationalrating
scale.
•Th
eACHSresearch
ver-
sion
consistsof
20hand
skillitemsratedon
a6-po
intratingscale.
•Ascoreof
6indicates
very
effectivehand
skill
performance,w
hereas
ascoreof
1indicates
veryineffectivehand
skill
performance.
Children’shand
skillsare
dividedinto
6distinctcat-
egories:manualgesture,
body-contacthand
skills,
adaptiveskilled
hand
use,
arm–handuse,bimanual
use,andgeneralactivities.
•Assessm
entbo
oklet
•Naturalistic
environm
ent
•Pencil
Composite
scoresan
dsu
bscalescoresforthe6
han
dskill
categories
are
generated.
Assessm
entof
Motor
and
Process
Skills
(AMPS;
Gantschnig,Page,Nilsson,
&Fisher,2013)
Mod
elof
Hum
anOccup
a-tionandoccupational
performance
Population:Childrenwith
typicaldevelopmentorm
ilddisabilitiesages
4–15
yr.
Perspective:Th
erapistor
clinicianadministeredand
scored.
Purpose:T
odifferentiate
andmeasure
themotor
Internationally
standardized
observationalassessment
ofactivities
ofdaily
livingin
which
thechild
isratedon
16motor
and20
process-
ingADLitems.
Takesapproximately1hr
toadminister.
Com
puter-generatedresults
•Testmanual
•Scoring
sheets
Scoresformotor
andpro-
cessingskills
(Con
tinued)
e190 September/October 2014, Volume 68, Number 5
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table2.
Sum
maryof
Instrumen
tsforChildrenan
dYou
thDescribed
inArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
Instrument(Article)
Fram
eof
Reference/
TheoreticalorPracticeModel
Pop
ulation/Group;
Perspective;Purpose,U
se,
orIntent
ofInstrument
Descriptionof
Instrument
Adm
inistrationand
Scoring
TimeRequired
Sub
scales
orItem
Categories
Resou
rces
and
Equipm
entRequired
Scoresand
Results
Obtained
andprocessing
skillsof
childrenwith
andwithou
tdisabilitiesduring
ADL
tasks.
Ayres
Sensory
Integration
(ASI)FidelityMeasure
(Parham
etal.,20
11)
Sensory
integrationtheory
Population:Notapplicable.
Perspective:Th
ird-party
raters,w
hocompleteFi-
delityMeasure
toinvesti-
gatewhether
servicepro-
videdon
thebasisofsensory
integrationprinciples
aligns
with
theoreticalprinciples.
Purpose:T
odo
cument
whether
interventions
car-
ried
outareinaccordance
withtheessentialpro-
ceduralasp
ects
ofASI
intervention,to
monitor
replicableASIintervention
deliveryinresearch
such
asrand
omized
clinical
trials,and
todifferentiate
betweenASIandother
typesof
intervention.
•Addresses
thekeystruc-
turaland
processele-
mentsofASIintervention.
•Parts1–4measure
the
structuralelem
ents.
•Part5measuresthera-
pistadherenceto10
pro-
cesselem
ents(e.g.,tailors
activity
topresentjust-
rightchallenge).
•Scoring
involves
subjectivity.
•Scoredon
a4-pointLikert
scale.
•AtotalFidelity
scoreof
100equalsaperfectm
atch
toASIinterven
tion
strategies.
•TotalFidelity
scoreof
80was
designated
asthe
tentativecutpoint
forde-
term
iningwhether
anobserved
intervention
sessionadhered
toASI
therapeuticprinciples.
Totalsummed
rawscore
•Training
•Pen
TotalFidelityscore
Box
andBlock
Test
(Jon
gbloed-Pereboo
m,
Nijhuis-vanderSanden,
&Steenbergen,201
3)
Biomedical
fram
ework;
ICF:Bod
yStructure
and
FunctionandActivity
Population:Childrenages
3–10
yrwith
differencesin
hand
function.
Perspective:Childcompletes
timed
test;therapist-or
clinician-administeredand
scored
onthebasisof
specificcriteria.
Purpose:T
oprovideper-
form
ance
scoreon
norm
edstandardized
testof
gross
manualdexterity.
Stand
ardizedandspecifi-
cally
measuredsetofboxes
that
fitinside
each
other.
Timetoadministervaries—
longerforyou
ngerchildren
(£30
min)
Raw
scores
convertedto
standard
scores.Each
ishand
scored
separately.
•Box
with
partition
•Blocks
•Timer
•Scoring
form
s
Stand
ardscores
ChildOccupationalS
elf
Assessm
ent(COSA;
Mod
elof
Hum
anOccupation
Population:Childrenwith
disabilitiesages
6–17
yr.
Consistsof
aseries
of25
itemsthat
representa
rangeof
everyday
activi-
•Can
beadministeredin1
of3ways:(1)standard
paper-and-pencilform
at
COSAratingscalecon-
verted
to1–
4fordataentry
anddelivered
todatabase
•Assessm
ent
•Manual
•Training
inadministration
List
ofactivities
that
the
child
feelsless
competent
doingbu
tforwhich
heor
(Con
tinued)
The American Journal of Occupational Therapy e191
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table2.
Sum
maryof
Instrumen
tsforChildrenan
dYou
thDescribed
inArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
Instrument(Article)
Fram
eof
Reference/
TheoreticalorPracticeModel
Pop
ulation/Group;
Perspective;Purpose,U
se,
orIntent
ofInstrument
Descriptionof
Instrument
Adm
inistrationand
Scoring
TimeRequired
Sub
scales
orItem
Categories
Resou
rces
and
Equipm
entRequired
Scoresand
Results
Obtained
Kramer,Kielhofner,&Smith,
2010)
Perspective:Self-repo
rt(child-friendlyratingscale).
Purpose:S
elf-repo
rtofoc-
cupationalcom
petence
andvalueforeveryday
ac-
tivities
design
edto
involve
childreninidentifying
goals
andassessingoutcom
es;
measurestheextent
towhich
childrenfeelthey
competentlymeetexpec-
tations
andrespon
sibilities
associated
with
activities
andtherelativevalueof
thoseactivities.
tiesthatmostchildrenen-
counterathome,atschool,
andin
theircommunities.
thatprovides
differentvi-
sualcues
foreach
rating
category
description,(2)
card-sortversionthat
placeseach
item
on
aseparatecard
andeach
ratingcategory(and
visual
cue)on
alargerrating
card,and
(3)summary
form
thatpresentsall
itemsandratingcategories
inamatrix
form
atwithout
visualcues.
•Takesapproximately30
minto
complete.
•Each
item
isratedusing
two4-pointratingscales:
OccupationalCom
petence
scaleandValuesscale.
foranalysis(inthestudy
described).Use
byclini-
cians,includ
ingscoring,
notdescribed.
sheindicateshigh
impor-
tance;
theseactivities
can
beaddressedin
therapy.
Children’sAssessm
entof
ParticipationandEnjoy-
ment/Preferences
forAc-
tivities
ofChildren(CAPE/
PAC;P
otvin,Snider,
Prelock,K
ehayia,&
Woo
d-Dauphinee,2
013)
PEO
model
andICF
Population:Childrenwith
andwithoutdisabilityages
6–18
yr.
Perspective:Self-repo
rtof
child’sperception;canin-
cludethird-partyparent
assistance.
Purpose:S
elf-ratedmea-
surethatestim
ates
achild’s
participationou
tsideof
school;childrencomplete
theassessmentindepen-
dentlyor
supp
ortedby
anadultthroughadaptations.
Bookletandscoresheet
form
atforself-selectionof
respon
sethatmost
representschild’s
perspective
•30
–60minto
administer
andscore
•Con
sistsof
55itemsre-
latedto
participation(46
ofthesearerecreational)
•Provides
inform
ation
about5dimensions
of
participation:intensity,
socialaspect,location,
child
’sdegreeof
enjoy-
mentintheactivity,and
preference
•Pen
•Assessm
ent
•Manual
Raw
scores
within
dimensions
Children’sLeisure
Assessm
entScale
(CLA
SS;R
osenblum
,Sachs,&
Schreuer,2010)
OccupationalTherapy
Prac-
ticeFram
ework(2nd
ed.;
AOTA
,200
8),occup
ational
performance
Population:Childrenand
adolescents.
Perspective:Self-repo
rt.
Purpose:Tomeasuremul-
tidimensionalparticipation
inchildren’sandadoles-
cents’leisureactivities;
Consistsof30
itemsun
der
4factors:(1)instrumental
indoor
activities,(2)out-
door
activities,(3)self-
enriched
activities,and
(4)games
andsports
ac-
tivities,which
relate
to6
dimensionsof
leisurepar-
Thedimensionsof
par-
ticipationarescored:
•Variety:sum
scoreof
participationinactivities
(05
notdoing
theactivity
atall,15
doingthe
activity)
•Con
sistsof
30itemsun
-der4factors:(1)instru-
mentalindooractivities,
(2)o
utdo
oractivities,(3)
self-enriched
activities,
and(4)gam
esandsports
activities.
•Manual
•Assessm
ent
•Scoring
sheet
•Pen
Allowsevaluationof
lei-
sure
activities
amongtyp-
icallydeveloping
children
andadolescents. (Con
tinued)
e192 September/October 2014, Volume 68, Number 5
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table2.
Sum
maryof
Instrumen
tsforChildrenan
dYou
thDescribed
inArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
Instrument(Article)
Fram
eof
Reference/
TheoreticalorPracticeModel
Pop
ulation/Group;
Perspective;Purpose,U
se,
orIntent
ofInstrument
Descriptionof
Instrument
Adm
inistrationand
Scoring
TimeRequired
Sub
scales
orItem
Categories
Resou
rces
and
Equipm
entRequired
Scoresand
Results
Obtained
design
edto
document
children’sperceptions
abouttheirtim
einvestment
inleisureactivities
andtheir
ambitions
regardingcertain
activities
thatthey
would
liketo
undertakebuthave
notfor
avarietyofreasons.
ticipation:variety,frequency,
sociability,preference,tim
econsum
ption,
anddesired
activities.
•Frequency:measured
ona4-pointLikert-type
scale(1
5on
ceinafew
mon
ths,25
once
amon
th,3
5twiceaweek,
and45
everyday)
•Sociability:defin
edby
who
performed
theac-
tivity
with
thechild,rated
ona4-pointLikert-type
scale(1
5alone,25
with
arelative,35
with
onefriend
,and
45
with
friend
s)•Preference:ratedon
a10
-point
scalerang
ing
from
1(dono
tlikeatall)
to10
(likevery
much)
Com
prehensive
Observa-
tions
ofProprioception
(COP;B
lanche,B
odison,
Chang
,&Reino
so,201
2;Blanche,R
einoso,C
hang,
&Bodison,2012)
Proprioceptionandsensory
integrationtheory,motor
control,ICF
Population:Childrenage
³2yr
with
suspected
proprioceptiveprocessing
difficulties.
Perspective:Observational
assessment;theCOP
guides
clinicalob
serva-
tions
andhelpstheclini-
cian
identifyadequate
performance
anddeviation
from
typicalparam
eters
usingdefin
edcriteria;pro-
fessionalscoresperfor-
mance
onthebasisof
specificcriteria.
Purpose:T
omeasure
pro-
prioceptiveprocessing
inchildren.
•Con
tains18
itemsfocus-
ingon
motor
andbehav-
iorregulationaspectsof
prop
rioceptivepro-
cessinginchildren.
•Measures4factors:(1)
tone
andjointalignm
ent,
(2)behavior
manifesta-
tions,(3)po
sturalmotor,
and(4)motor
planning
.•Can
beused
inavariety
ofcontexts,suchas
the
home,clinic,and
school.
Takes15
mintoadminister;
therapistobserves
child
andratestheCOPitems.
Measures4factors:
(1)
tone
andjointalignm
ent,
(2)behavior
manifesta-
tions,(3)po
sturalmotor,
and(4)motor
planning
.
Copyof
scaleandplaceto
observechild
TotalCOPscoreplus
4factor
scores
Develop
mentalTestof
Visual–Motor
Integration
(VMI;Brown,Unsworth,&
Lyon
s,20
09)
Perceptual–motor
theory
Population:Childrenages
2–17
yr.
Perspective:Perform
ance
based;profession
alscores
Consistsof
27geom
etric
form
sto
becopied
and
organizedin
developm
en-
talsequence.
•Adm
inistrationtakesap-
proximately15
min,and
scoringtim
eisapproxi-
mately10
min.
Totalscore
•Pencil
•Testbo
oklet
•Manual
•Raw
score
•Stand
ardscore
•Percentile
•Stanine
•Age
equivalent (Con
tinued)
The American Journal of Occupational Therapy e193
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table2.
Sum
maryof
Instrumen
tsforChildrenan
dYou
thDescribed
inArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
Instrument(Article)
Fram
eof
Reference/
TheoreticalorPracticeModel
Pop
ulation/Group;
Perspective;Purpose,U
se,
orIntent
ofInstrument
Descriptionof
Instrument
Adm
inistrationand
Scoring
TimeRequired
Sub
scales
orItem
Categories
Resou
rces
and
Equipm
entRequired
Scoresand
Results
Obtained
performance
onthebasis
ofspecificcriteria.
Purpose:V
isual–motor
screeningtoolto
identify
childrenwho
areexperi-
encing
difficulty
coordina-
tingvisualperceptionand
motor
movem
ents;has
2supp
lementstandardized
tests:VMIVisualPerception
andVMIMotor
Coo
rdina-
tion.Can
beadministered
individu
allyor
inagrou
p.
Do-Eat(Josm
an,G
offer,&
Rosenblum
,201
0)Ecolog
icalpracticemodel,
PEO
model,Occup
ational
TherapyPracticeFram
e-work(2nd
ed.)
Population:Childrenwith
DCD.
Perspective:Th
erapistob
-servationandparent
orthird-partyqu
estionn
aire.
Purpose:T
oevaluatedaily
task
performance
abilities
amongchildrenwith
DCD;
assistswith
establishing
custom
ized
goalsandob
-jectives
forintervention.
Ecologicallyvalid
assess-
ment;focuseson
food
pre-
paration,draw
ing,writing,
andcutting.
•Childisaskedtoperform
3tasks:(1)Makeasand-
wich,(2)preparechoco-
latemilk,and
(3)fillout
acertificateof
outstand-
ingperformance
forh
im-
orherself.
•See
Appendix1of
article
forassessment.
•Accom
panyingparental
questionn
aire
consists
of12
positivestatem
ents.
Assessm
entisadminis-
teredinnaturalsurroun
d-ings
(e.g.,kind
ergarten,
family
kitchen).
•Scoring
issum
totaled.
•Throughoutperform
ance,
child
receives
scorefor
performingthetask,anal-
ysisscoreforsensory–
motor
skills,andanalysis
scoreforexecutivefunc-
tioning.
•Testscores
rangefrom
1(unsatisfactoryperfor-
mance)to
5(verygo
odperformance).
•Accom
panyingparental
questionnaire
scored
onscalerang
ingfrom
1(never)to
5(always).
•Overalltask
performance
scoreiscalculated.
•Overallscoreanalyzing
sensory–motor
skillsand
executivefunctioning.
•Testinclud
essummary
scoresheetsincluding
scores
discussedinpre-
ceding
bulletsandparen-
talquestionnaire
score.
•Score
forperformingthe
task
•Analysisscorefor
sensory–motor
skills
•Analysisscoreforexecu-
tivefunctioning
•Parentalquestionn
aire
score
•Assessm
ent
•Manual
•Ingredientsfortasks
•Certificatethatchild
fills
out
•Score
card
•Overalltask
performance
score
•Overallscoreanalyzing
sensory–motor
skillsand
overallscore
analyzing
executivefunctioning
•Sum
marytestscore
sheetsincludingscores
inprevious
bulletand
parentalquestionnaire
score
(Con
tinued)
e194 September/October 2014, Volume 68, Number 5
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table2.
Sum
maryof
Instrumen
tsforChildrenan
dYou
thDescribed
inArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
Instrument(Article)
Fram
eof
Reference/
TheoreticalorPracticeModel
Pop
ulation/Group;
Perspective;Purpose,U
se,
orIntent
ofInstrument
Descriptionof
Instrument
Adm
inistrationand
Scoring
TimeRequired
Sub
scales
orItem
Categories
Resou
rces
and
Equipm
entRequired
Scoresand
Results
Obtained
Evaluationof
SocialInter-
action(ESI;Grisw
old&
Townsend,20
12)
Mod
elof
Hum
anOccupation
Population:Childrenages
2–12
yrwith
andwithou
tadisability.
Perspective:Perform
ance-
basedassessmentgained
throughobservation(verbal
andnonverbalbehaviors);
professionalscores
perfor-
mance
onthebasisofspe-
cific
criteria.
Purpose:T
oassess
the
quality
ofsocialinteraction
inchildrenas
abaselineto
measure
change
insocial
interactionperformance;
enablesoccupationalther-
apistto
plan
interventions
toaddressspecificsocial
interactionskilldeficits
for
childrendu
ring
activities
innaturalcon
texts.
Socialinteractionperfor-
mance
isscored
on27
skillsthatrelateto
initia-
tingandending
asocial
interaction,producingthe
interaction,physically
supportingtheinteraction,
shapingthecontentand
maintaining
theflo
wof
the
interaction,verballysup-
portingtheinteraction,and
adaptingto
prob
lemsthat
might
arisedu
ring
the
interaction.
•27
skillsarescored
on4-
pointcriterion-referenced
ratingscale.
•Scoresareplaced
inES
Isoftware,which
generates
ameasureofthequality
ofsocialinteraction.
•Socialinteractions
are
categorizedby
theirin-
tended
purpose.
•Categories:gatheringin-
form
ation,sharinginfor-
mation,problem
solving
ordecision
making,
col-
labo
ratingor
prod
ucing,
acquiringgoodsand
services,conversingsoci-
allyor
makingsm
alltalk
Naturalenvironm
entto
ob-
servechild
(school,home,
kindergarten,park,etc.)
•Measure
ofthequality
ofsocialinteraction(objec-
tivemeasure):baseline
tomeasure
change
insocialinteraction
performance
•Raw
scores
convertedto
logits
EvaluationTo
olof
Child-
ren’sHandw
riting(ETC
H;
Brossard-Racine,Mazer,
Julien,&Majnemer,2012;
Duff&Goyen,201
0)
PEO
model,occupational
performance,andOccu-
pationalTherapy
Practice
Fram
ework(2nd
ed.)
Population:School-age
children.
Perspective:Professional
scores
performance
onthe
basisof
specificcriteria.
Purpose:Standardizedmea-
surethatassesses
arange
ofhandwritingtaskssimilar
tothoseexperienced
inthe
classroomsetting;designed
toidentifyandcharacterize
handwritingdifficulties
inyoungschool-age
children.
•Th
eET
CHisavailablein
bothmanuscriptand
cur-
sive
versions.
•Th
eManuscriptversion
oftheET
CH(ETC
H–M
)targetschildreninGrades
1–3andexam
ines
legibilitythrough7differ-
enttasks:alphabet,
writingfrom
mem
ory
(upper-andlowercase),
numeralwritingfrom
mem
ory,near-point
copying,far-pointcopying,
dictationofnon-words
and
numbers,and
compo-
sitionofashortsentence.
•Takesapproximately30
minto
administer.
•Letters,nu
merals,and
words
arejudg
edfor
legibilityusingalistof
specificcriteriasuch
asom
ission,closing,m
is-
placing,reversion,and
poor
erasure.
•Thepercentage
oflegi-
bilityisdeterm
ined
for
each
task
bycoun
tingthe
legibleletters,nu
merals,
orwords
anddividing
bythetotalnum
berof
let-
ters,num
erals,or
words
requ
ired.
•Thepercentagesfrom
each
taskarethen
averaged
toprovideatotallegibility
Sum
total
•Assessm
ent
•Manual
•Pen
orpencil
•To
tallegibilityscore(for
wordandletter)
•Perform
ance
timeand
writingspeedscore
(Con
tinued)
The American Journal of Occupational Therapy e195
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table2.
Sum
maryof
Instrumen
tsforChildrenan
dYou
thDescribed
inArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
Instrument(Article)
Fram
eof
Reference/
TheoreticalorPracticeModel
Pop
ulation/Group;
Perspective;Purpose,U
se,
orIntent
ofInstrument
Descriptionof
Instrument
Adm
inistrationand
Scoring
TimeRequired
Sub
scales
orItem
Categories
Resou
rces
and
Equipm
entRequired
Scoresand
Results
Obtained
scoreforletters,num
erals,
andwords.
•Perform
ance
timeor
writingspeedismeasured
insecond
sforthealph
a-betandnu
meralwriting
tasksandinlettersper
minuteforthecopying
andcompo
sitiontasks.
Family
L.I.F.E.(Loo
king
Into
Family
Experiences;
Honaker,Rosello,&
Candler,
2012)
Occupationaladaptation
practicemodelandOccu-
pationalTherapy
Practice
Fram
ework(2nd
ed.)
Population:Families
with
achild
with
autism
spectrum
disorder.
Perspective:Self-repo
rtby
family.
Purpose:Occupation-based
assessmentthatengages
families
andtherapistsin
acollaborativepartnership
toidentifyunique
andre-
levantfamily
occupations,
evaluatetheseoccupations,
andmeasureperceivedsuc-
cess
intheseoccupations.
•Assessm
entincludesde-
mographicsectionand
atim
ediaryof
atypical
weekday
andatypical
weekend
day(helps
toidentifyroutines
and
rituals).
•8interviewqu
estions
fo-
cuson
family
together-
ness,childrearing,and
impacton
family
occupations.
•Likertscaleisused
torateeach
occupationon
perceivedeffectiveness,
efficiency,andsatisfaction.
•Th
esum
ofthescores
istallied
foreachfactorand
dividedby
thenu
mberof
occupations
toachieve
aseparateoverallscore.
Sum
totalto
give
overall
score
•Assessm
ent
•Manual
Overallscore
Health
PromotingActivi-
tiesScale(HPAS;B
ourke-
Taylor,Law
,Howie,&
Pallant,2012)
PEO
model,ecological
practicemod
elPopulation:Initiallydevel-
oped
formothers
ofchild-
renwith
adisability.
Perspective:Self-repo
rtinstrument.
Purpose:T
omeasure
the
frequencyof
participation
inhealthyoccupations
that
areassociated
with
mental
health
andwell-being.
•8itemswith
activity
key
forparticipantsto
consi-
der
theirself-selected
occup
ations
•Respo
nseitemsarerated
ona7-pointscaleranging
from
daily
tonever.
Sum
total
Singlecomposite
score
Freelyavailablebriefscale
Totalscore
LifeParticipationforParents
(Fingerhut,2013)
Occupationaladaptation
practicemod
el,family-
centered
practice
Population:Parents
of
childrenwith
adisability.
Perspective:Self-repo
rtof
parent.
Contains22
questions
ask-
ingparentsabou
ttheir
ability
toparticipate.
•Th
equ
estions
areans-
wered
ona5-po
intLikert
scalerangingfrom
strongly
agreetostronglydisagree,
with
alowerscoreindi-
catingless
satisfaction
TotalS
tressscoreandsub-
scalescores:Satisfaction
With
EfficiencyandSatis-
factionWith
Effectiveness
•Assessm
ent
•Pen
Scoressum
totaled:
over-
alland2subscales
(Con
tinued)
e196 September/October 2014, Volume 68, Number 5
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table2.
Sum
maryof
Instrumen
tsforChildrenan
dYou
thDescribed
inArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
Instrument(Article)
Fram
eof
Reference/
TheoreticalorPracticeModel
Pop
ulation/Group;
Perspective;Purpose,U
se,
orIntent
ofInstrument
Descriptionof
Instrument
Adm
inistrationand
Scoring
TimeRequired
Sub
scales
orItem
Categories
Resou
rces
and
Equipm
entRequired
Scoresand
Results
Obtained
Purpose:Tofacilitate
family-centeredpediatric
practiceby
measuring
the
abilityof
parentsto
partic-
ipateinlifeoccupations
whileraisingachild
with
specialneeds.
withoccupational
participation.
•Reverse
scoringof
posi-
tivelywordedqu
estions
ManualA
bilityClassifica-
tionSystem
(Kuijper,van
derWilden,K
etelaar,&
Gorter,20
10)
ICF:Bod
yStructuresand
Functions
andActivity
Population:Child
ren
ages
5–14yr
with
cerebralp
alsy
(CP).
Perspective:Th
irdparty—
either
parent
orprofes-
sionalwho
know
sthechild’s
performance.
Purpose:C
lassification
system
with
5levelsper-
tainingto
defin
eduseof
thehand
sby
childrenwith
CP.
Theclassificationsystem
hasadecision
tree
toguide
thescorer
(occup
ational
therapistorp
hysician).Fo-
cuseson
theway
children
with
CPusebo
thof
their
hand
swhenhand
lingob
-jectsindailyage-appropriate
activities.
•Has
5classificationsys-
tem
levels:(1)
Handles
objectseasilyandsuc-
cessfully;(2)handlesmost
objectswith
somew
hat
reducedquality
andspeed
ofachievem
ent;(3)hand-
lesobjectswith
difficulty,
needshelptoprepareor
modifyactivities;(4)
hand
lesalim
itedselec-
tionof
easilymanaged
objectsinadaptedsitua-
tions;and
(5)do
esno
thand
leob
jectsandhas
severelylim
itedabilityto
perform
even
simple
actions.
•Th
escaleisordinal,and
thedistancesbetween
levelsareno
tcon
sidered
equal.
Handuseisclassifiedat
1of
the5levelsby
skilled
observer.
Obtainclassificationscore
for1of
5levels.
•Manualand
scoresheets
canbe
downloadedfrom
http://www.m
acs.nu
/•Availableinmultiple
lang
uages.
•The
assessmentrequires
nospecialtrainingfor
occupationaltherapists
andph
ysicians.
Obtainclassificationscore
for1of
5levelsregarding
hand
functionforchildren
with
CP
McD
onaldPlayInventory
(MPI):M
cDon
aldPlayAc-
tivity
Inventory(M
PAI)and
PEO
andOccupationalPer-
form
ance
models
Population:Childrenages
7–11
yr.
•Madeup
of2parts:(1)
theMPAI,which
measures
thechild’sperceivedfre-
•MPAI:Ratethefrequency
ofparticipationinactivity
on5-pointLikert-scale
MPIiscompo
sedof
two
parts:
MPAIandMPSI.
•Assessm
ent
•Manual
•Pen
•To
talscore
•Sub
scalescores
(Con
tinued)
The American Journal of Occupational Therapy e197
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table2.
Sum
maryof
Instrumen
tsforChildrenan
dYou
thDescribed
inArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
Instrument(Article)
Fram
eof
Reference/
TheoreticalorPracticeModel
Pop
ulation/Group;
Perspective;Purpose,U
se,
orIntent
ofInstrument
Descriptionof
Instrument
Adm
inistrationand
Scoring
TimeRequired
Sub
scales
orItem
Categories
Resou
rces
and
Equipm
entRequired
Scoresand
Results
Obtained
McD
onaldPlayStyleIn-
ventory(M
PSI;McD
onald
&Vigen,201
2)
Perspective:Self-repo
rt(child)or
thirdparty,and
includ
ingparentalrepo
rt.
Purpose:T
wo-partchild
self-ratedscaleof
play.
quency
ofengagementin
4categories
thatform
4subscales(FineMotor,
Gross
Motor,S
ocial
Group,S
olitary),and(2)
theMPSI,which
mea-
suresthetypesandfre-
quency
ofplay
behaviors
(affectivecompo
nent)in
4domains:physicalco-
ordination,coop
eration,
peer
acceptance,and
socialparticipation.
•MPSIcon
sistsof24
play
behavior
items(6
items
ineach
category),12
neu-
tralplay
activity
items,and
4“lie”orsocialdesirability
items.
(never,aboutonce
ortwice
ayear,aboutonce
ortwice
amonth,about
once
ortwiceaweek,or
almost
everyday).
•MPSI:Raterespon
seson
5-pointLikertscale(never,
hardlyever,som
etimes,
alot,andalways)
•Adm
inistrationtim
e:15
minwithoutassistance,
20–30minwith
assistance
Melbourne
Assessm
ent
ofUnilateralU
pper
Limb
Function(M
AUULF;Spirtos,
O’Mahony,&Malone,
2011)
ICF:Bod
yStructuresand
Functions
andActivity
Population:Childrenwith
neurolog
icalimpairments
ages
5–15
yr.
Perspective:Perform
ance
basedor
thirdparty.
Purpose:C
riterion
-referenced
assessmentto
measure
quality
ofup
per-
limbmovem
entinchildren
with
aneurological
impairment;measures1
hand
atatim
e.Widely
used
toexam
inetheef-
fectivenessof
specific
interventions.
•Con
tains16
itemsthat
exam
inethechild’sper-
form
ance
ontasks.
•Individualitemsarescored
under4categories:(1)
rang
eof
movem
ent,(2)
targetaccuracy,(3)
flu-
ency,and
(4)qu
ality
ofmovem
ent.
•Individualitemsarescored
under4categories.
•Each
item
isscored
ona
scaleofeither0–
3or0–
4(the
manualprovides
adetaileddescriptionof
whatisrequired
foreach
score).
Totalrawscores
arecon-
verted
topercentages.
•Trainingsessionfor
scoring,althoughskill
leveloftrainerisunknow
n•Manual
•Totalpercentagescore
•Designedto
evaluate
change
over
time
Motor-FreeVisualP
ercep-
tionTest–R
evised
(MVP
T–R;
Tsai,Lin,Liao,&Hsieh
,2009)
Perceptual–motor
theory
Population:Childrenages
4–12
yr.
Perspective:Perform
ance-
basedassessment;profes-
sionalscores
performance
Consistsof
40itemsdi-
videdinto
spatialrelation-
ships,visualmem
ory,
visualdiscrim
ination,
figure
ground,and
visual
closure.
•To
talscore
ranges
from
0to
40po
ints.
•Item
sareeither
righ
tor
wrong.
•Th
ewho
lescaleisad-
ministeredto
candidate.
One
totalsum
med
scoreis
calculated.
•Answer
sheet
•Testmanual
•Boo
kof
item
plates
•To
talraw
scalescore
•Stand
ardscore
•Percentile
•Stanine
•Age
equivalent (Con
tinued)
e198 September/October 2014, Volume 68, Number 5
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table2.
Sum
maryof
Instrumen
tsforChildrenan
dYou
thDescribed
inArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
Instrument(Article)
Fram
eof
Reference/
TheoreticalorPracticeModel
Pop
ulation/Group;
Perspective;Purpose,U
se,
orIntent
ofInstrument
Descriptionof
Instrument
Adm
inistrationand
Scoring
TimeRequired
Sub
scales
orItem
Categories
Resou
rces
and
Equipm
entRequired
Scoresand
Results
Obtained
onthebasisof
specific
criteria.
Purpose:T
oassess
child-
ren’svisual–p
erceptual
strengthsandweaknesses.
OccupationalS
elfAs-
sessment(OSA;Taylor,
Lee,Kramer,S
hirashi,&
Kielhofner,20
11)
Mod
elof
Hum
anOccupation
Population:Can
beused
with
adolescentsandadults.
Perspective:Self-repo
rt.
Purpose:C
lient-centered
evaluationtoolthatmea-
suresclients’perceptions
oftheirow
ncompetence
andthevaluethey
assign
tooccupations.
Clientsrate
theircompe-
tenceinandimportance
ofeveryday
activities
for21
items;theclientchoo
ses4
itemsthathe
orshewould
liketo
change.
Takesapproximately30
min
tocompleteand15
minto
score.
Scoresarecalculated
for
21qu
estions
and2sub-
scales,Com
petenceand
Values.
•Scoring
sheets
•Pencil
•Sum
maryscoresforitems;
also
provides
scores
for2
subscales,Com
petence
andValues
PediatricEvaluationof
DisabilityInventory–
Com
puterAdaptiveTest
(PED
I–CAT;Kao,K
ramer,
Liljenquist,Tian,&Coster,
2012)
ICF
Population:Childrenand
youn
gpeop
lewith
adis-
abilitythroughage21
yr.
Perspective:Judg
ment-
based,standardized
instru-
mentusing
parentalreports
orstructured
interviewwith
professionalwho
know
sthe
child.
Purpose:T
oevaluatethe
child’scapabilityinthe
social–cognitive,daily
activities,m
obility,and
responsibilitydomains.
•Consistsof
thefollowing
domains:dailyactivi-
ties
(68item
s),social-
cogn
itive(60item
s),
andresponsibility(51
items).
•Alsomeasuresenviron-
mentalsupportsand
modificationsthat
the
child
needsto
complete
activities.
Sum
total;rawscores
are
transformed
into
scaled
scores
foreach
domain.
Raw
scores
thataretrans-
form
edinto
scaled
scores
Com
puterdatabase
Scaledscores
providean
indicationof
achild’s
performance
onrelatively
easy
torelativelydifficult
itemsinaparticulardomain.
PediatricOutcomes
Data
CollectionInstrumen
t(PODCI;Mulcaheyetal.,
2013
)
Functionaloutcomemea-
surement;ICF:BodyStruc-
turesandFunctions
and
Activity
Population:Childrenand
adolescentsages
4–21
yr.
Perspective:Th
erapistor
clinicianadministeredand
scored;professionalscores
performance
onthebasis
ofspecificcriteria.
Purpose:Toprovidean
out-
comemeasureforthe
upper-
extrem
ityandactivity
items
ThePODCIconsists
of52
finalUpperExtrem
ityitems
and34
Activity
items.
Takesapproximately1hr
toadminister.
Scalesincludeup
per
extrem
ityandph
ysical
function,
transfer
and
basicmob
ility,spo
rts/
physicalfunction,pain/
comfort,treatment
expectations,happiness,
satisfactionwith
symptom
s,andglob
alfunctioning.
•Com
puter
•Com
puteradaptivetest
prog
ram
•ScaleitemsthattheCAT
runs
throughwith
respon
dent
ScoresfortheUpp
erEx-
trem
ityandActivity
subscales
(Con
tinued)
The American Journal of Occupational Therapy e199
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table2.
Sum
maryof
Instrumen
tsforChildrenan
dYou
thDescribed
inArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
Instrument(Article)
Fram
eof
Reference/
TheoreticalorPracticeModel
Pop
ulation/Group;
Perspective;Purpose,U
se,
orIntent
ofInstrument
Descriptionof
Instrument
Adm
inistrationand
Scoring
TimeRequired
Sub
scales
orItem
Categories
Resou
rces
and
Equipm
entRequired
Scoresand
Results
Obtained
ofthePODCIwhenappliedto
brachialplexus
injury.
Prescho
olIm
itationand
PraxisScale(PIPS;
Vanvuchelen,R
oeyers,&
DeWeerdt,20
11)
Playtheory,O
ccup
ational
Perform
ance
ofChildren
mod
el,and
PEO
practice
mod
els
Population:Preschoolchild-
renages
1–5yr.
Perspective:Perform
ance-
basedassessment;profes-
sionalscores
performance
onthebasisof
specific
criteria.
Purpose:T
oassess
the
accuracy
ofbo
dily
proceduralimitation
performance
inyoun
gchildren
•Con
sistsof
10task
cat-
egories(6
gestural,3
procedural,and
1facial)
and30
PIPStasks.
•Perform
ance
isscored
ona3-
or5-po
intscale.
•Sum
total
•FinalP
IPSscoreisaref-
lectionoftheaccuracy
ofthechild’simitationper-
form
ance.
•Adm
inistrationtakes
10–20min.
The30
tasksaredivided
into
10task
categories.
•PIPSmanual
•PIPSassessment
•Pen
toscore
•Item
sinassessment:toy
bear,w
oodenblock,toy
animalwith
lampinit,
box,cup,
doll,toycar,
bed,
blanket
Totalscore
Qualityof
LifeinSchool
Version
2(QoL
S;
Weintraub
&Bar-Haim
Erez,200
9)
Biopsychosocialmodel
andPEO
model
Population:School-age
children.
Perspective:Self-repo
rt.
Purpose:S
elf-ratedmea-
sure
evaluatingstud
ent’s
schoolqu
ality
oflifefrom
amultidimensional
perspective.
Con
sistsof36item
sdi-
vided
into
4categories:
(1)teacher–student
re-
lation
ship
andschool
ac-
tivities
(12item
s),(2)
physicalenvironmentof
schoolandclassroo
m(11
item
s),(3)negativefeel-
ings
towardschool
(8item
s),and(4)po
sitive
feelingstowardschool
(5item
s).
Gainscoreforeach
cate-
gory
andtotalscho
ol36
itemsdividedinto
4catego
ries
•Training
inassessment
administration
•Assessm
ent
•Manual
•Pen
Raw
scoreforeach
cate-
gory
andtotalscore
Schoo
lFun
ctionAssess-
ment(SFA;Hwang&Davies,
2009)
Ecolog
ical
assessment,
functional
assessment,
applicationof
Rasch
measurementmodel
Population:School-age
children.
Perspective:Th
irdparty;
teacherob
serves
the
studentandprovides
ratings
onthebasisof
observation.
Purpose:C
riterion
-referenced
assessment
thatmeasuresawidespec-
trum
ofschool-related
functionaltasks
associated
with
theroleof
elem
en-
tary
schoolchild;guides
program
planning
forstu-
dentswith
specialneeds.
Consistsof
18scales
madeup
of26
6items.
Scoredon
a4-po
intrating
scale(1
5do
esno
tper-
form
,45
consistent
per-
form
ance)
Activity
Perform
ance
scale
consistsof18
scales
made
upof
266items
•Manual
•Assessm
ent
•Pen
Totalscore
(Con
tinued)
e200 September/October 2014, Volume 68, Number 5
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table2.
Sum
maryof
Instrumen
tsforChildrenan
dYou
thDescribed
inArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
Instrument(Article)
Fram
eof
Reference/
TheoreticalorPracticeModel
Pop
ulation/Group;
Perspective;Purpose,U
se,
orIntent
ofInstrument
Descriptionof
Instrument
Adm
inistrationand
Scoring
TimeRequired
Sub
scales
orItem
Categories
Resou
rces
and
Equipm
entRequired
Scoresand
Results
Obtained
Schoo
lVersion
oftheAs-
sessmentof
Motor
and
Process
Skills
(School
AMPS;M
unkholm,B
erg,
Lofgren,&Fisher,2
010)
Mod
elof
Hum
anOccupation
Population:Childrenages
3–13
yrattend
ingan
edu-
cationalprogram
orschool.
Perspective:Th
irdparty;
discussion
with
teacher
andperformance-based
observationof
child
com-
pleting2tasksinan
edu-
cationorclassroomcontext;
professionalscores
per-
form
ance
onthebasisof
specificcriteria.
Purpose:Fun
ctionalas-
sessmentformeasuring
thequ
ality
ofscho
olwork
task
performance
asitis
observed
inthenatural
classroom
setting.
Consistsof26
schoolwork
tasksplus
16scho
olmo-
torand20
scho
olprocess
skillitems.
Tasksrang
efrom
simpleto
complex:
pen-writingtasks,
pencil-
writingtasks,
draw
ing,
coloring
tasks,cuttingand
pastingtasks,
compu
ter
writingtasks,
math,
and
manipulativetasks.
•Th
erapistun
obtrusively
observes
studentsintheir
naturalclassroom
envi-
ronm
ent.
•Therapistscoresthequal-
ityofobserved
perfor-
mance
usingthescoring
criteriaforthe16
school
motorand20
schoolpro-
cess
skillitemson
a4-po
intratingscale.
•2lineargraphs
represent
thequ
ality
ofschoolwork
performance
measures:
(1)scho
olmotor
quality
ofperformance
and(2)
scho
olprocessqu
ality
ofperformance.
•Form
altraining
inadministration
•Paper,pen
•Com
puterandprog
ram
•Manual
Twoscho
olworkperfor-
mance
measures:
(1)
school
motor
quality
ofperformance
and(2)
school
processqu
ality
ofperformance
Sense
andSelf-Regulation
Checklist(SSRC;S
ilva&
Schalock,20
12)
Behavioralself-regulation
andsensoryprocessing
paradigm
Population:Childrenage
<6yr
with
developm
ental
delay.
Perspective:Th
irdparty—
parent
orcaregiver.
Purpose:T
oidentifyareas
ofsensoryandself-
regulationdifficulty
toas-
sess
thechild’srespon
seto
treatm
ent.
•Measures2domains:
sensorydifficulties
and
self-regulation.
•Sensory
difficulties
do-
mainhas6subd
omains:
touch–pain,auditory,vi-
sual,taste–smell,hyper-
reactiveto
noninjurious
stimuli,andhypo
reactive
tono
ninjurious
stimuli
(additionalcategory
created:abnorm
altouch–pain).
•Self-regu
lationdo
main
has6categories:sleep,
appetite–digestion,self-
soothing
,orientation–
attention,aggressive
behavior,and
self-
injuriou
sbehavior.
•Scoredon
a4-pointrating
scale:0(never),1(rarely),
2(som
etimes),and3
(often)
Sum
total
Caregiversmust
haveel-
emen
tary
school
educa-
tionandread
English,
Spanish,
orChinese.
Twodo
mainscores
(1for
sensoryand1forself-
regulation)
SensoryExperiencesQues-
tionnaire
(SEQ
;Littleetal.,
2011)
Sensoryprocessing
model
Population:Childrenages
7–72
mowith
suspected
•Brief(10–
15min)care-
giverrepo
rt•Takes10
–15minto
complete.
Totalscoreand4subscale
scores
(hyperrespon
si-
•Assessm
entform
•Pen
Raw
totalscoreand4
subscalescores (Con
tinued)
The American Journal of Occupational Therapy e201
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table2.
Sum
maryof
Instrumen
tsforChildrenan
dYou
thDescribed
inArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
Instrument(Article)
Fram
eof
Reference/
TheoreticalorPracticeModel
Pop
ulation/Group;
Perspective;Purpose,U
se,
orIntent
ofInstrument
Descriptionof
Instrument
Adm
inistrationand
Scoring
TimeRequired
Sub
scales
orItem
Categories
Resou
rces
and
Equipm
entRequired
Scoresand
Results
Obtained
autism
andrelated
developm
entaldisorders.
Perspective:Parentor
caregiverreport.
Purpose:B
riefcaregiver
questionn
aire
foryoun
gchildrenwith
suspected
autism
anddevelopm
ental
delays;u
sedto
identify
sensoryprocessing
patterns
(hypo-
and
hyperresponsiveness)
inthecontextof
daily
ac-
tivities.Itisdesign
edtobe
used
asasupp
lementto
diagnosticanddevelopm
ental
assessments.
•Yields4dimensional
subscalescores
aswell
asatotalscore.
•Item
sreflect5sensory
domains:tactile,audi-
tory,visual,vestibular–
prop
rioceptive,and
gustatory–olfactory.
•Containsqualitativeques-
tions
regardingparent
compensatorystrategies
used
inresponse
tothe
sensoryprocessing
problemsexperiencedby
thechild.
•Caregiver
respon
sesare
basedon
a5-po
intLikert
scalerang
ingfrom
1(almostnever)to
5(almostalways).
•Higherscores
indicate
moresensoryprocessing
problems.
veness,hypo
responsive-
ness,social,andnonsocial)
Sensory
ProfileCaregiver
Questionn
aire
(SPCQ;O
hletal.,20
12)
Dunn’sModelof
Sensory
Processing
Population:Childrenages
3–12
yr.
Perspective:Th
irdparty:
parent
reportor
caregiver
questionn
aire.
Purpose:T
oprovideinfor-
mationabou
tchildren’s
tendencies
torespon
dto
stimuliand
which
sensory
system
sarelikelycontri-
butingor
creatingbarriers
tofunctionalperform
ance.
Sensory
Profilecontains
>125
itemsorganizedin-
to3sections:(1)
sensory
processing,w
hich
contains
6item
categories
thatmeasure
children’s
respon
sesto
inform
ation
takeninthroug
hthe
sensorysystem
s;(2)
modulation,which
contains
5item
categories
that
measure
children’sability
tomonitorandregulate
inform
ationto
generatean
appropriateresponse
tothesituation;and(3)
behavioralandem
otional
responses,which
contains
3itemcategoriesthatmea-
surechildren’sem
otional
andbehavioralresponsesto
sensoryexperiences.
•Needmanualfor
scoring
guidelines.
•Caregiversrecord
thefre-
quency
with
which
their
child
displays
each
item
behavior
ona5-point
Likertscale(1
5always,
25
frequently,3
5occa-
sionally,4
5seldom
,55
never).
•Respo
nses
aretotaledon
aSum
maryScore
Sheet
thatyields
2scores:sec-
tionscoreandfactor
score.
•Sectionscore,which
pro-
videsavisualsummaryof
children’ssensoryproces-
sing,m
odulation,and
behavioralandem
otional
response
abilities
•Factor
score,which
cap-
tureschildren’sresponses
tosensoryexperiences
onthebasisofnotsolelytheir
sensorysystem
sbutalso
otheraspectsofsensory
processing
•Quadrantscore,which
measuresthedegree
towhich
childrenmiss,ob
-tain,detect,or
arebo
th-
ered
bysensoryinpu
t
•Manual
•Assessm
entsheets
•Sum
maryscore
•Sheet
•Pen
Section,
factor,andquad-
rant
scores
(Con
tinued)
e202 September/October 2014, Volume 68, Number 5
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table2.
Sum
maryof
Instrumen
tsforChildrenan
dYou
thDescribed
inArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
Instrument(Article)
Fram
eof
Reference/
TheoreticalorPracticeModel
Pop
ulation/Group;
Perspective;Purpose,U
se,
orIntent
ofInstrument
Descriptionof
Instrument
Adm
inistrationand
Scoring
TimeRequired
Sub
scales
orItem
Categories
Resou
rces
and
Equipm
entRequired
Scoresand
Results
Obtained
Slosson
VisualM
otor
Per-
form
ance
Test(SVMPT;
Brown,Unsworth,&
Lyons,
2009)
Perceptual–motor
theory
Population:Childrenages
4–18
yr.
Perspective:Perform
ance
based;profession
alscores
performance
onthebasis
ofspecificcriteria.
Purpose:S
creening
toolto
identifypeop
lewith
visual–m
otor
perceptual
prob
lemsinwhich
hand
–eyecoordinationis
involved;m
easures
aperson
’sabilityto
interpretandtranslate
visuallyperceived
geom
etricpatterns.
Consistsof
14geom
etric
figures;each
iscopied
3tim
es.
Adm
inistrationtakesap-
proximately20
min,and
scoringtim
eisapproxi-
mately10
min.
One
totalscore
•Pencil
•Testbo
oklet
•Manual
•Raw
score
•Stand
ardscore
•Percentile
•Stanine
•Age
equivalent
Testof
Visual–Motor
In-
tegration(TVMI;Brown,
Unsworth,&
Lyon
s,20
09)
Perceptual–motor
theory
Population:Childrenages
4–17
yr.
Perspective:Perform
ance
based;profession
alscores
performance
onthebasis
ofspecificcriteria.
Purpose:S
tand
ardized
norm
-referencedtestof
visual–m
otor
integration;
used
todo
cument
presence
anddegree
ofvisual–m
otor
difficulties
inchildren.
•Con
sistsof30
geom
etric
figures.
•Usesacopyingform
atwherebychild
rencopy
figu
reinto
designated
space.
Adm
inistrationtakesap-
proximately20
min,and
scoringtim
eisapproxi-
mately10
min.
One
totalscore
•Pencil
•Testbo
oklet
•Manual
•Raw
score
•Stand
ardscore
•Percentile
•Stanine
•Age
equivalent
TestofVisual-MotorSkills–
Revised
(TVMS–R
;Brown,
Unsworth,&
Lyons,2009)
Perceptual–motor
theory
Population:Childrenages
3–13
yr.
Perspective:Perform
ance
based;profession
alscores
performance
onthebasis
ofspecificcriteria.
•Con
sistsof23
geom
etric
figures.
•Usesacopyingform
atwhereby
childrencopy
figureinto
designated
space.
•Adm
inistrationtakesap-
proximately20
min,and
scoringtim
eisapproxi-
mately10
min.
•Whenscoring,itallows
therapistto
catego
rize
achild’svisual–m
otor
errors
andaccuracies.
One
totalscore
•Pencil
•Testbo
oklet
•Manual
•Raw
score
•Stand
ardscore
•Percentile
•Stanine
•Age
equivalent (Con
tinued)
The American Journal of Occupational Therapy e203
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table2.
Sum
maryof
Instrumen
tsforChildrenan
dYou
thDescribed
inArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
Instrument(Article)
Fram
eof
Reference/
TheoreticalorPracticeModel
Pop
ulation/Group;
Perspective;Purpose,U
se,
orIntent
ofInstrument
Descriptionof
Instrument
Adm
inistrationand
Scoring
TimeRequired
Sub
scales
orItem
Categories
Resou
rces
and
Equipm
entRequired
Scoresand
Results
Obtained
Purpose:A
ssesseschild-
ren’sabilityto
translate,
with
theirhand
s,whatthey
visuallyperceive
togainan
understandingofthechild-
ren’sstreng
thsandweak-
nesses
invisual–m
otor
integrationabilities.
Testof
Visual–Perceptual
Skills–R
evised
(TVPS–R
;Tsai,L
in,Liao,
&Hsieh,
2009
)
Perceptual–motor
theory
Population:Childrenages
4–12
yr.
Perspective:Perform
ance-
basedassessment;profes-
sionalscores
performance
onthebasisof
specific
criteria.
Purpose:T
oassess
child-
ren’svisual–p
erceptual
strengthsandweaknesses.
•Con
sistsof
112items
grou
pedinto
7subscales.
•To
talscore
rang
esfrom
0to11
2po
ints,and
sub-
scalescores
rang
efrom
0to
16po
ints.
Sum
total
7subscalescores
arecal-
culated:
visualdiscrimina-
tion,visualmem
ory,visual–
spatialrelationships,visual
form
constancy,visual
sequentialm
emory,visual
figure–grou
nd,and
visual
closure.
•Answer
sheet
•Testmanual
•Boo
kof
item
plates
•To
talraw
scoreandsub-
scalescores
•Stand
ardscore
•Percentile
•Stanine
•Age
equivalent
WeeklyCalendarPlann
ing
Activity
(WCPA;Tog
lia&
Berg,2013;W
einer,Toglia,
&Berg,2012)
Cog
nitive–behavioraland
ecolog
icalpracticemod
els
Population:Ado
lescents
andadultsage16
and
older.
Perspective:Perform
ance-
basedassessment;profes-
sionalscores
performance
onthebasisofspecific
criteria.
Purpose:Tomeasu
reeveryday
executivefunction
skillsofadolescentsand
adults.
•18appo
intm
entsarepre-
sented
inarand
omly
orderedlist.
•The
participantisrequired
toentertheappointm
ents
into
a1-wkschedule
whilerecogn
izingand
managingconfl
ictsand
adhering
to5written
rules.
•Th
erulesinclud
e(1)
leaveWednesday
free,
(2)do
notcrossou
tappo
intm
entson
cethey
areentered,(3)inform
theexam
iner
whenitis
aspecified
time,(4)do
notrespon
dto
dis-
tractingqu
estions
from
theexam
iner,and
(5)in-
form
theexam
iner
when
finished.
•Strategiesused
during
thetask
arerecorded
onalistof
16preidentified
strategies.
•Scorescalculated
in-
cludetotalaccuracyof
appointm
entplacem
ent
onthecalendar,errors
madeinappo
intm
ent
placem
ent,planning
time
andtotaltasktim
e,num-
berofrulesfollowed,and
type
ofstrategies
used.
•Totalaccuracyof
ap-
pointm
entplacem
enton
thecalendar
•To
talerrorsmadeinap-
pointm
entplacem
ent
•Self-reporterrors
•Inaccuracy
errors
•Repetition
errors
•Plann
ingtim
e•To
taltasktim
e•N
umbero
frules
followed
•Num
berof
strategies
used
•Type
ofstrategies
used
•Paper
•Pencil
•WCPAproform
a•WCPAtestmanual
•WCPAtestbo
oklet
•Table,chair,andqu
iet
room
fortesttaker
•Totalaccuracyof
ap-
pointm
entplacem
enton
thecalendar
•To
talerrorsmadein
appointm
entplacem
ent
•Self-reporterrors
•Inaccuracy
errors
•Repetition
errors
•Plann
ingtim
e•To
taltasktim
e•N
umbero
frules
followed
•Num
berof
strategies
used
•Type
ofstrategies
used
(Con
tinued)
e204 September/October 2014, Volume 68, Number 5
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table2.
Sum
maryof
Instrumen
tsforChildrenan
dYou
thDescribed
inArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
Instrument(Article)
Fram
eof
Reference/
TheoreticalorPracticeModel
Pop
ulation/Group;
Perspective;Purpose,U
se,
orIntent
ofInstrument
Descriptionof
Instrument
Adm
inistrationand
Scoring
TimeRequired
Sub
scales
orItem
Categories
Resou
rces
and
Equipm
entRequired
Scoresand
Results
Obtained
•Strategiesused
during
thetask
arerecorded
onalistof
16preidentified
strategies.
Note.DCD5
developm
entalcoordinationdisorder;ICF5
InternationalC
lassificationof
Functioning,D
isabilityandHealth
(WorldHealth
Organization,2007);PEO
5Person–Environm
ent–Occupationmodel.
Sug
gested
citation:Brown,T.,&
Bourke-Taylor,H
.(2014
).Centenn
ialVision—
Childrenandyouthinstrumentd
evelopmentand
testingarticlespublishedintheAmerican
JournalofO
ccup
ationalTherapy,200
9–20
13:A
content,
metho
dology,and
instrumentdesign
review
(Table2).A
merican
JournalofOccupationalTherapy,6
8,e154
–e21
6.http://dx.do
i.org/10.50
14/ajot.20
14.01223
7
The American Journal of Occupational Therapy e205
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table3.Critiqu
eof
Childrenan
dYou
thInstrumen
tDevelop
men
tan
dTe
stingArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lTh
erap
y,Janu
ary20
09–S
eptembe
r20
13
InstrumentandAuthor
Purpose
ofInstrumentand
Practicality
Levelof
Evidence
and
Stage
ofInstrument
Develop
ment
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyPractice
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyTheory
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyResearch
Limitations
ofStudy
Strengths
ofStudy
AdolescentsandAdults
Co-
ordinationQuestionnaire
(AAC–Q
;Saban,O
rnoy,
Grotto,&Parush,2012)
Purpose:D
escriptiveand
discriminative
Practicality:S
elf-report
12-item
scale;very
easy
toadministerandscore
LevelIII
Stage
7:reliability
assessment
Can
assist
asan
initial
screeningtoolforado-
lescents
andadults
sus-
pected
ofhavingDCD.
Scalecanbe
used
toas-
sess
theoretical
assump-
tions
ofmotor
control
theory
andotherrelated
constructs.
•Can
beused
toinvesti-
gatetheprevalence
ofDCDintheadult
popu
lation.
•Can
beused
toevaluate
theeffectivenessof
in-
terventions
targeted
atadultswith
DCD.
•Study
completed
in1
geog
raphicarea
sotheremay
bebias
inthe
results.
•Authors
didno
tinclud
ecopy
ofthescaleinthe
publishedarticle.
•Noconstructvalidity
re-
gardingwhether
scale
itemsload
onasingle
DCDfactorwas
reported.
•Prelim
inarypsycho
met-
ricprop
ertiesof
scale
look
prom
ising.
•Provision
ofcutoffscores
ishelpfulfor
clinical
applications.
•Isbrief,user
friend
ly,
andecolog
icallyvalid.
Assessm
entof
Children’s
HandSkills
(ACHS;C
hien,
Brown,&McD
onald,
2010)
Purpose:D
escriptive,dis-
criminative,predictive,
andpotentialforevaluative
Practicality:H
aveto
pur-
chasetestbo
okletsand
manual;have
toreceive
specialisttraining
toad-
ministerandscoreinstru-
ment;need
well-ho
ned
observationskillsto
beableto
scoreinstrument
LevelIII
Stage
7:reliability
assessment
•Can
beused
toassess
acomprehensive
rang
eof
hand
skillsforuse
with
differentpo
pu-
lations
ofchildren.
•Cou
ldbe
used
asan
outcom
emeasure
after
aroun
dof
intervention
hasbeen
provided.
•Usesnaturalistic
obser-
vationan
dfitswithan
occupation-cen
tered
assessmen
tap
proach
toprovideoccupational
therapistswith
inform
a-tionabou
tchildren’s
hand
skillperformance
inmeaning
fuloccup
a-tions
thatarecompleted
indaily
contexts.
•Isatop-do
wn
assessmenttoolthat
provides
inform
ation
abou
tchildren’sactivity
performance.
Couldbe
used
toevaluate
theeffectivenessof
oc-
cupationaltherapyin-
terventionprog
rams.
•Requires
specialized
trainingto
administer
andscore.
•Not
commerciallyavail-
able;h
aveto
contact
author
directly.
•Onlypreliminarypsycho-
metricdatahave
been
reported
byits
author;no
externalresearchershave
evaluatedtheinstrument.
•Usesnaturalistic
obser-
vationandfitswith
anoccupation-centered
assessmentapproach
togenerateinform
ation
abou
tchildren’shand
skillassessmentp
erfor-
mance
inmeaningful
occupations
thatarecom-
pleted
indaily
contexts.
•Strongpreliminarypsy-
chom
etricevidence
aboutconstructvalidity
ofinstrumentusing
Rasch
analysisapproach
Assessm
entof
Motor
and
Process
Skills
(AMPS;
Gantschnig,Page,Nilsson,
&Fisher,2013)
Purpose:D
escriptive,dis-
criminative,predictive,
andevaluative
Practicality:S
pecific
quali-
ficationrequired
toad-
ministertheAMPSwith
childrenforclinicalor
research
purposes
LevelIII
Stages8and10
:reliability
andvalidity
study
Stand
ardizedassessment
ofmotor
andprocessing
skillsdu
ring
functional
tasks;
provides
clinical
inform
ationaboutareas
forgo
alsandservice
direction.
Goo
dtool
toinvestigate
underpinning
sof
MOHO
andforoccupationalper-
form
ance
whenachild
hasmotor
orprocessing
differences.
May
bevery
useful
inre-
search,particularly
ret-
rospectivedata
analysis
that
investigates
relation-
shipsbetweenun
derlying
skillsandperformance.
Continuedpsycho
metric
evaluationneeded
tode-
term
inesensitivity
tochange
over
time.
Largecentrally
held
AMPSdatabase
offers
the
possibility
ofnu
merou
sknow
ledg
etranslation
research
oppo
rtun
ities.
Ayres
SensoryIntegration
(ASI)FidelityMeasure
(Parham
etal.,20
11)
Purpo
se:D
iscriminative
andpredictive
Practicality:R
equiresex-
periencedandexpertin-
dividualtoratefeatures
of
LevelIV
Stage
3:contentvalidity
evaluation
Adherence
totheASIFi-
delityMeasure’sstructural
andprocesselem
entswill
increase
thelikelihoodthat
interventions
labeledASI
TheFidelityMeasure
pro-
videsan
internationalstan-
dardby
which
todeterm
ine
whether
anintervention
representsASI,which
TheFidelityMeasure
pro-
videsan
internationalstan-
dardby
which
todeterm
ine
whether
anintervention
representsASI.
•Didno
tfieldtesttheASI
FidelityMeasure
with
novice
clinicians.
•Veryexperiencedexpert
panelw
asengagedto
establishthecontent
validity
oftheASIFidel-
ityMeasure. (Con
tinued)
e206 September/October 2014, Volume 68, Number 5
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table3.
Critiqu
eof
Childrenan
dYou
thInstrumen
tDevelop
men
tan
dTe
stingArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
InstrumentandAuthor
Purpose
ofInstrumentand
Practicality
Levelof
Evidence
and
Stage
ofInstrument
Develop
ment
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyPractice
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyTheory
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyResearch
Limitations
ofStudy
Strengths
ofStudy
therapysessionto
getac-
curatemeasuresof
fidel-
ityto
ASIprinciples
covered
andprovided
byqualified
therapistsarefaithfulto
ASIprinciples
notonlyin
research
butalso
inedu-
cationandpractice.
ensuresthattheASI
modelisappliedcorrectly.
•Didnotinvestigatethe
constructvalidity
ofthe
ASIFidelityMeasure.
•Expertpanelhad
inter-
nationalrepresentation,
which
decreasesrisk
ofgeog
raphicbias.
Box
andBlock
Test
(Jon
gbloed-Pereboo
m,
Nijhuis-vanderSanden,&
Steenbergen,2
013)
Purpo
se:D
iscriminative
Practicality:R
equiresman-
ualand
specificboxes,
blocks,and
scoringsheet;
little
training
necessary
LevelIII
Stages7and8:
reliability
andvalidity
study
Stand
ardizedassessment
ofgrossdo
minantand
nondom
inanthand
func-
tionthat
may
easilybe
used
forpretest–posttest.
May
beuseful
toinvesti-
gate
underpinning
sof
biom
echanicalmod
el.
May
beused
toinvestiga-
teefficacyof
biom
edical
oroccupationaltherapy
interventions
andmea-
sure
outcom
eson
1or
both
upperextrem
ities.
Continuedpsycho
metric
evaluationneeded
tode-
term
inesensitivity
tochange
over
time.
Norm-referenced,
easily
administeredhand
func-
tiontool
that
does
relate
toreal-life
functionalhand
use.
ChildOccupationalSelfAs-
sessment(COSA;K
ramer,
Kielhofner,&Smith,2010)
Purpose:D
escriptiveand
evaluative
Practicality:Can
beadmin-
isteredin1of3ways:stan-
dardpencilandpaper,card
sort,and
matrixform
at
LevelIII
Stages7and8:
reliability
andvalidity
study
•Child-centeredand
child-reportedtoolthat
measuresextent
towhich
child
ismeeting
expectations
and
responsibilitiesindaily
activities
andthe
importance
ofthose
activities.
•Directsclinical
interventionby
identifying
important
activities
thatmight
beprioritized
intherapy.
Sound
tool
that
may
beused
inresearch
that
in-
vestigates
underpinning
sof
MOHOor
anyPEO
model.
May
beused
toinvestiga-
teefficacyofoccupational
therapyinterventions
from
clients’perspectives.
•Extend
validity
andrelia-
bilitystud
iesto
includ
erandom
ized
sampling
andstandardized
admin-
istrationof
themeasure
whendataarecollected
from
across
culturesand
worldregions.Further
validity
studiesmight
includeandanalyzedata
from
theperspectiveof
otherchild
andenviron-
mentalvariables.
•Alsorequ
ires
evaluation
ofrespon
siveness
tochange.
MOHO-based
assessment
tool
that
measureschild’s
subjectiveexperience
ofoccupationinapsycho-
metrically
soundway
for
clinicalor
research
purposes.
Children’sAssessm
entof
ParticipationandEnjoy-
ment/Preferences
for
Activities
ofChildren
(CAPE/PAC;P
otvin,
Snider,Prelock,K
ehayia,
&Woo
d-Dauphinee,
2013
)
Purpose:D
escriptive,
discriminative,and
evaluative
Practicality:C
hildrates
theintensity
(frequ
ency),
socialaspect,location,
enjoym
ent,andpreference
forleisureandrecreational
pursuits.Easyto
admin-
isterandscore.
LevelIII
Stages8and10
:evalua-
tionofthescale’smea-
surementproperties
byother
than
thescale’s
authors
Veryrelevant
topractice;
provides
child’sperspec-
tiveaboutparticipationin
homeandcommunity
contexts.
Usefulin
studiesinvesti-
gatingtheoretical
under-
pinn
ings
ofoccupational
therapytheory
(e.g.,Ca-
nadian
Modelof
Occupa-
tionalPerform
ance
and
Engagement,ICF).
May
beusedas
client-
centeredoutcome
measu
re.
Continuedpsycho
metric
evaluationneeded
tode-
term
inesensitivity
tochange
over
time.
Goodreliabilityand
validity
evidence
reported.
(Con
tinued)
The American Journal of Occupational Therapy e207
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table3.
Critiqu
eof
Childrenan
dYou
thInstrumen
tDevelop
men
tan
dTe
stingArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
InstrumentandAuthor
Purpose
ofInstrumentand
Practicality
Levelof
Evidence
and
Stage
ofInstrument
Develop
ment
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyPractice
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyTheory
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyResearch
Limitations
ofStudy
Strengths
ofStudy
Children’sLeisureAssess-
mentS
cale(CLA
SS;
Rosenblum
,Sachs,&
Schreuer,2010)
Purpose:D
escriptive,dis-
criminative,predictive,and
evaluative
Practicality:Easily
admin-
isteredtoolto
measure
participationinleisure
activities
amongchildren
ages
10–18yr.
LevelIII
Stages7and8:
reliability
andvalidity
study
May
beused
clinicallyto
determ
inealeisureactiv-
itypreference
foryoun
gchildrenwithoutdisability.
May
beuseful
toinvesti-
gate
relationshipbetween
childho
odoccupations
andanyPEO
mod
el.
May
beusefulinresearch
abou
tchildho
odoccupa-
tions,participation,
and
otherchild-related
factors.
Requiresfurtherevalua-
tionto
determ
inedis-
criminantvalidity
for
childrenwith
andwithou
tdisability,
aswellas
sen-
sitivity
tochange
over
time.
Offersvery
descriptive
preference
andparticipa-
tionprofi
leof
children’s
leisurepreferences.
Com
prehensive
Observa-
tions
ofProprioception
(COP;B
lanche,B
odison,
Chang
,&Reino
so,201
2)
Purpose:D
escriptive,dis-
criminative,andevaluative
Practicality:R
elatively
easy
toob
tainand
administer;takes15
min
ofob
servingchild
inanaturalistic
environm
ent
LevelIII
Stage
8:validity
anddi-
mensionality
assessment
Can
beused
toassess
children’sprop
rioceptive
processing
skills.
Derived
from
literature
basedon
sensory
integration.
Couldbe
used
toevaluate
theeffectivenessof
occu-
pationaltherapy
interven-
tionprog
ramsor
couldbe
used
todescribe
clinical
features
ofchildrenwith
suspecteddevelopm
en-
taldelayor
motor
skill
prob
lems.
•Stillinearlystages
ofpsycho
metricdevelop-
mentandvalidation.
•Nono
rmativescores
are
available.
•Has
notbeen
evaluated
orappliedinstudiesby
others
than
Blanche,
Bod
ison,etal.(2012
).
•Blanche,B
odison,etal.
have
documentedthe
phases
andcomponents
ofthedevelopm
entofthe
COP.
•Prelim
inaryevidence
ofCOP’sinterrater
reliabi-
lity,face
validity,content
validity,constructvalid-
ity,criterion
validity,and
factorstructurehasbeen
reported.
Develop
mentalTestof
Visual–Motor
Integration
(VMI;Brown,
Unsworth,
&Lyon
s,20
09)
Purpo
se:D
iscriminative,
predictive,andevaluative
Practicality:H
aveto
pur-
chasetestbo
okletsand
manual;relativelyeasy
toadministerandscore
LevelIII
Stages8and10
:validity
anddimensionality
assessment
Can
beusedto
assess
child
ren’svisual–motor
integrationskills.
Isabo
ttom
-upassess-
menttool
that
pro-
videsinform
ationabou
tchildren’sbo
dyfunctions
andstructures.
Couldbe
used
toevaluate
theeffectivenessof
occu-
pationaltherapy
interven-
tionprog
ramsor
toestablishthevisual–m
otor
baselineskillsof
certain
diagnosticgroups
ofclients.
•Doesno
tprovideinfor-
mationabou
tchildren’s
occupationalperfor-
mance.
•Testbo
okletsandman-
ualhavetobe
purchased,
creatingcostissue.
•Wellestablished,
with
strong
psycho
metric
characteristics
•Testhasbeen
widely
used.
•Largestandardization
grou
pon
which
norm
a-tivescores
arebased
Do-Eat(Josman,G
offer,
&Rosenblum
,201
0)Purpose:D
escriptive,dis-
criminative,andpredictive
Practicality:C
hildisre-
quired
toparticipatein3
tasks,with
appropriate
equipm
entandenviron-
mentneeded:m
aking
sandwich,making
chocolatemilk,and
hand
writing.
LevelIII
Stages7and8:
reliability
andvalidity
study
Offerscapabilityto
mea-
sure
thefunctionalabili-
tiesof
childrenwith
DCD;
also
assistsin
goal
developm
ent.
Goo
dtool
toinvestigate
underpinningsoffunctional
skillsandperformance.
Goo
dapplicationforre-
search
purposes
Continuedpsycho
metric
evaluationneeded
tode-
term
inesensitivity
tochange
over
time.
Psychom
etrically
and
theoreticallysoun
dtool
specificto
childrenwith
DCD
(Con
tinued)
e208 September/October 2014, Volume 68, Number 5
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table3.
Critiqu
eof
Childrenan
dYou
thInstrumen
tDevelop
men
tan
dTe
stingArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
InstrumentandAuthor
Purpose
ofInstrumentand
Practicality
Levelof
Evidence
and
Stage
ofInstrument
Develop
ment
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyPractice
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyTheory
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyResearch
Limitations
ofStudy
Strengths
ofStudy
Evaluationof
SocialInter-
action(ESI;Grisw
old&
Townsend,20
12)
Purpose:D
escriptive,dis-
criminative,predictive,and
evaluative
Practicality:The
evaluator
(occup
ationaltherapist)
observes
thechild
ashe
orsheengagesindesired
relevant
activities
innat-
uralcontextwith
usual
socialpartners.
LevelIII
Stage8:validity
assessment
•Clinicallyusefulway
tomeasure
children’sso-
cialinteractions
innat-
uralsettings.
•Providesstandardized
way
tomeasure
differ-
encesinsocialinterac-
tionandmeasurechange
over
time.
Can
beused
toevalu-
ateun
derpinning
sof
socialinteractions
and
participation.
Usefulforoccupational
therapyresearch
toeval-
uate
underpinning
sof
socialinteractions
and
participationandforeffi-
cacy
studiesevaluating
occupationaltherapy
interventions.
Test–retestandinterrater
reliabilitystudiesneeded
forpediatricpo
pulation;
sensitivityto
change
over
timeneedsevaluationbe-
forevalidationas
outcom
emeasure.
Goodreliabilityandvalidity
forpediatric
population.
EvaluationTo
olof
Child-
ren’sHandw
riting(ETC
H;
Brossard-Racine,Mazer,
Julien,&Majnemer,2012;
Duff&Goyen,2010)
Purpose:D
escriptive,dis-
criminative,predictive,and
evaluative
Practicality:The
evaluator
observes
andthen
rates
achild’shand
writing
using1of
2handwriting
versions:m
anuscriptand
cursive.Provides
standardized
before-and-
aftermeasure
ofhand
writingcompetency.
LevelIII
Stages8and10
:validity
assessment
Highlyuseful
inpediatric
occupationaltherapy
prac-
ticein
school
andclinic
settings.
Specific
hand
writinglegi-
bilityandfunctionalityfor
childrenin
elem
entary
school.
Can
beused
toevaluate
theeffectivenessof
ahand
writingintervention
prog
ram
orto
differenti-
atebetweentypicaland
atypical
hand
writing—
determ
ineneed
andeligi-
bilityforservices.
•Requires
sensitivity
tochan
geovertimeand
rando
mized
sampling.
•Mightbe
used
inefficacy
studiestoinvestigateef-
ficacyandefficiencyof
occupationaltherapy
in-
terventions
thataim
toimprovehandwriting.
Goodreliabilityandval-
idity
evidence
reported.
Family
L.I.F.E.(Loo
king
Into
Family
Experiences;
Honaker,Rosello,&
Candler,
2012)
Purpose:D
escriptiveand
discriminative
Practicality:R
equiresman-
ualand
therapist–family
collaborationto
identify5
keyfamily
occupations
and
limiting
factors
LevelIII
Stage
7:reliability
assessment
Engagesfamilies
andther-
apists
inacollaborative
partnershipandprom
otes
family-centeredpractice.
Tool
may
beusefulto
evaluatethetenets
of
occupational
adaptation
orfamily-centeredprac-
tice
models.
Usefulresearch
tool
toidentifysubjectivefamily
issues
pre-
and
postintervention.
Furtherpsycho
metric
evaluationrequired
for
validationandreliability.
Emph
asizes
clinicaland
research
considerationof
avery
impo
rtantfactor
inthesupp
ortsystem
availableto
achild
with
adisability:
thefamily.
Health
PromotingActivi-
tiesScale(HPAS;B
ourke-
Taylor,Law
,How
ie,&
Pallant,201
2)
Purpose:D
escriptiveand
evaluative
Practicality:E
asy,brief,
lowparticipantbu
rden,
completed
byparticipant,
freelyavailablethrough
McM
asterwebsite
(http://www.canchild.ca/
en/m
easu
res/health_
promoting_activities_
scale.asp)
LevelIII
Stage
8:validity
anddi-
mensionality
assessment
May
beused
inclinical
practicein
numerous
contexts
working
with
caregivers.
Providesevidence
abou
ttheassociations
amon
gparticipationin
meaning-
fulself-selectedleisure
pursuits,
mentalhealth,
andwell-being.
•Psychom
etrically
soun
dscalewith
lowrespon
seburden
thatmeasures
theperson’sperspective.
•May
beused
asan
out-
comemeasure
because
scoringrelatestothefre-
quency
ofparticipation.
Initialstudydidnotinclude
secondaryvalidationof
diagnosisof
mentalhealth
condition;didnotinclude
test–retest
reliability
or
testsofsensitivity
toch
angeovertime.
Psychom
etrically
soun
dat
initial
stages
ofdevel-
opment;novelmeasure-
mentofcomplexand
meaningfulhuman
occupation.
(Con
tinued)
The American Journal of Occupational Therapy e209
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table3.
Critiqu
eof
Childrenan
dYou
thInstrumen
tDevelop
men
tan
dTe
stingArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
InstrumentandAuthor
Purpose
ofInstrumentand
Practicality
Levelof
Evidence
and
Stage
ofInstrument
Develop
ment
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyPractice
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyTheory
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyResearch
Limitations
ofStudy
Strengths
ofStudy
LifeParticipationforPar-
ents(Fingerhut,201
3)Purpose:D
escriptiveand
evaluative
Practicality:Fam
ilies
with
achild
with
adisability
completepaperqu
estion-
naireabou
tfamily
occu-
pations.
LevelIII
Stages7and8:
reliability
andvalidity
study
Clinically
useful
tofacili-
tate
family-centeredser-
vice
delivery;allowsfocus
onstrategies
toimprove
satisfactionwith
occupa-
tionalparticipation
Goo
dtool
toinvestigate
andevaluate
family-
centered
practice,
other
theoretical
fram
eworks
(ICF,PEO
,ecological
approach)
Usefultool
forsubjective
family
status
whenthere
isachild
with
adisability
inthefamily.
Continuedpsycho
metric
evaluationneeded
tode-
term
inesensitivity
tochange
over
time.
Psychom
etrically
soun
dfamily-centeredtool
that
couldbe
used
easilyin
both
clinicalpracticeand
theory.
Loew
ensteinOccup
a-tionalTherapy
Cognitive
Assessm
ent(LOTC
A;
Josm
an,A
bdallah,&
Engel-Yeger,2011)
Purpose:D
escriptive,dis-
criminative,predictive,and
evaluative
Practicality:R
equiresstan-
dardized
kitandscore
sheets
LevelIII
Stages8and10
:evalua-
tionof
scale’smeasure-
mentprop
ertiesby
those
otherthan
authors
Clinicalapplicationforoc-
cupationaltherapistsmay
includ
eschool
readiness
oruseinothersettings
todeterm
ineeligibility
or
areasforinterventions.
May
havefeasibility
asscreeningtoolforschool
entry.
May
beuseful
toinvesti-
gaterelationships
between
cognition
andoccupa-
tionalperform
ance
indaily
occupations;supp
orts
numeroustheoretical
concepts
inoccupational
therapy.
May
beused
toinvestigate
efficacyof
occupational
therapyinterventions,
although
sensitivity
tochange
hasnotbeen
es-
tablishedam
ongchildren.
Furtherresearch
isneeded
toestablishvalidity
inre-
lationto
cross-cultural
studies,
otherchild
and
sociodem
ographicfac-
tors,andactualfunctional
performance
inchildhood
occupation.
Requireslon-
gitudinalpredictivestud-
ies.
Also,
sensitivity
tochange
across
timere-
quires
investigationifto
beused
asan
outcom
emeasure.
Stand
ardizedassessment
ofcogn
ition
foryoun
gchildrenwith
capacity
todifferentiate
amongchil-
dren
with
andwithou
treadinessto
enterscho
olandearlyscho
olperfor-
mance
andotherissues.
ManualAbilityClassifica-
tionSystem
(MACS;
Kuijper,van
derWilden,
Ketelaar,&Gorter,20
10)
Purpose:D
escriptive,dis-
criminative,andpredictive
Practicality:Involvesther-
apists
observinghan
dskillsuse
andusing
decision-m
akingtree
toclassifyhand
function.The
manualisfreelyavailable.
LevelIII
Stages8and10
:validity
study
Excellent
clinicalapplica-
tionto
prom
otecommu-
nicationam
ongchildren,
families,andprofession-
alsandprovides
obser-
vationalmeasure
ofhand
functionthatmay
resultin
functionalgoalsetting.
May
beused
toinvesti-
gate
theoretical
under-
pinn
ings
ofoccupational
therapytheory
that
uses
aPEO
approach.
Applicationto
research
isgo
od.Providesresearch-
erswith
easily
rated
manualclassification
system
alongsidethe
widelyused
Gross
Motor
FunctionClassification
System
andmorerecent
Com
mun
icationFunction
ClassificationSystem.
•Th
isparticular
study
used
correlationalanal-
ysisforan
ordinalclas-
sificationscaleandthe
PED
Icaregiverscales
(Part2)
rather
than
the
PED
Ifunctionalskills
scale(Part1).
•Th
econclusion
thatthe
MACSisrelatedto
the
performance
ofdaily
self-care
skillsisinap-
prop
riatelydraw
nbe-
causePED
IPart1was
notused
inthestud
y.Th
erefore,fin
dings
mustbeinterpretedwith
caution.
TheMACShasgo
odre-
liabilityandvalidity
and
provides
afunctional
classificationto
facilitate
commun
icationam
ong
peoplewith
cerebralpalsy,
families,and
professionals.
(Con
tinued)
e210 September/October 2014, Volume 68, Number 5
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table3.
Critiqu
eof
Childrenan
dYou
thInstrumen
tDevelop
men
tan
dTe
stingArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
InstrumentandAuthor
Purpose
ofInstrumentand
Practicality
Levelof
Evidence
and
Stage
ofInstrument
Develop
ment
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyPractice
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyTheory
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyResearch
Limitations
ofStudy
Strengths
ofStudy
McD
onaldPlayInventory
(McD
onald&Vigen,2012)
Descriptive,discrim
inative,
andevaluative
Practicality:C
hildself-
repo
rtscalethatrequires
minimalresources
LevelIII
Stages7and8:
reliability
andvalidity
assessment
Can
beused
toassess
childrenpresentingwith
play-related
problems.
Providesevidence
abou
tchildren’sself-reported
perception
sabout
their
play
andplay
style.
Couldbe
used
toevaluate
theeffectivenessof
occu-
pationaltherapy
interven-
tionprog
rams.
•Con
venience
sample
•Limitedpsycho
metric
datahave
been
published
aboutthe
scale.
•Assessesan
important
area
ofchildren’soccu-
pationalperform
ance.
•Accesseschildren’sper-
spectives
abou
ttheir
play.
•Promisingpsychomet-
ricdataabou
tthescale
have
been
reported.
Melbourne
Assessm
ent
ofUnilateralU
pper
Limb
Function(M
AUULF;Spirtos,
O’M
ahony,
&Malone,
2011)
Purpose:D
escriptive,dis-
criminative,predictive,
andevaluative
Practicality:S
tandardized
kitrequired,aswellas
someinform
altraining
andpreparationforadm
in-
istrationandscoring.
LevelIII
Stages7and10
:evalua-
tionof
scale’smeasure-
mentprop
ertiesby
those
otherthan
authors
Stand
ardizedassessment
ofqualityoffunctional
movem
entfor1upp
erextrem
ity.
Goodtoolforrigorous
evaluationofqualityof
upper-lim
bmovem
entfor
biom
edical
interventions
aswellas
occupational
therapyinterventions.
Usefulforpre–
and
post–upper-extremity
evaluationforvariou
sin-
terventions
forchildren
with
hemiplegia.
Detailedtraining
andin-
structions
needed
for
clinicians
tolearnhow
reliablyadministeran
dscore
theMAUULF.
Psychom
etrically
soun
dupper-extrem
itytest
that
preciselymeasuresfunc-
tionalarm
andhand
movem
ent.
Motor-FreeVisualPercep-
tionTest–R
evised
(MVPT–
R;Tsai,Lin,Liao,&
Hsieh,
2009)
Purpose:D
escriptive,dis-
criminative,predictive,
andevaluative
Practicality:Fairlystraight-
forwardto
administerand
score
LevelIII
Stages7and10
:reliability
assessment
Can
beused
toestablish
thebaselineof
achild’s
visual–perceptualskills.
Can
beused
toinvestigate
theun
derpinning
sof
perceptual–m
otor
theory.
Can
beused
toestablish
theeffectivenessof
aninterventionprog
ram
orexplorethelinks
between
visual–perceptualskills
andchildren’soccupa-
tionalperform
ance.
•Smallsam
plesize.
•Datagathered
in1geo-
graphiclocation.
•Nolinkto
occupational
performance
ofchildren
made.
•Answersheets,testplate
book,and
testmanual
have
tobe
purchased,
creatingcostissue.
•Providesevidence
ofthe
reliabilityprop
ertiesof
theMVPT–
R.
•Isevidence
ofuseof
scaleinacross-cultural
context.
OccupationalSelfA
ssess-
ment(OSA;Taylor,Lee,
Kramer,S
hirashi,&
Kielhofner,20
11)
Purpose:D
escriptiveand
discriminative
Practicality:S
elf-report
scaleon
which
partici-
pantsareaskedtoansw
eror
rate21
statem
ents;
relativelyeasy
toadmin-
isterandscore
LevelIII
Stages8and10
:validity
assessment
Can
beused
with
avariety
ofclientgrou
ps,including
thosewith
mentalhealth
issues
orphysical
dis-
abilities
orolderadults.
Derived
from
constructs
relatedto
theMOHO.
Can
beused
toevaluate
theinterventionprograms;
canbe
used
tooperation-
alizeconstructs
from
the
MOHOandcanprovide
empiricalevidence
about
theMOHO.
•Dataweregathered
from
1geog
raphicalarea.
•Con
venience
sampling
was
used.
•Goodsamplesizetomin-
imizechance
ofType
Ierror.
•Use
ofItem
Respo
nse
Theory
provides
further
evidence
ofthescale’s
constructvalidity.
(Con
tinued)
The American Journal of Occupational Therapy e211
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table3.
Critiqu
eof
Childrenan
dYou
thInstrumen
tDevelop
men
tan
dTe
stingArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
InstrumentandAuthor
Purpose
ofInstrumentand
Practicality
Levelof
Evidence
and
Stage
ofInstrument
Develop
ment
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyPractice
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyTheory
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyResearch
Limitations
ofStudy
Strengths
ofStudy
PediatricOutcomes
Data
CollectionInstrument
(Mulcaheyetal.,20
13)
Purpose:D
escriptive,dis-
criminative,andevaluative
Practicality:Outcomemea-
sure
designed
forchildren
with
brachialplexus
injury
thatisadministeredvia
computeradaptivetest
LevelIII
Stages7and8:
reliability
andvalidity
assessment
Can
beused
toassess
the
upper-extrem
ityfunction
ofchildrenpresentingwith
brachialplexus
injuries.
Providesevidence
abou
ttheupper-extrem
ityfunc-
tionof
childrenpresenting
with
brachial
plexus
injuries.
Couldbe
used
toevaluate
theeffectivenessof
oc-
cupationaltherapyin-
terventionprog
ramsor
asan
outcom
emeasure.
Limitedpsycho
metric
data
reported.
Thisstud
yprovides
pre-
liminarypsycho
metric
results
ofapplicationto
childrenwith
brachial
plexus
injuries.
PED
I–Com
puterAdap-
tiveTest(Kao,K
ramer,
Liljenquist,Tian,&Coster,
2012
)
Purpose:D
escriptive,dis-
criminative,predictive,
andevaluative
Practicality:M
easurescare-
giver’s
orparent’sesti-
mationofthefunctional
abilitiesofchild
with
disabilities
LevelII
Stage
7and8:reliability
andvalidity
study
Offerscapabilityto
mea-
sure
thefunctionalabili-
tiesof
childrenwith
dis-
abilitiesviacomputerized
data
collection.
Clinical
applicationandavailability
arenotdescribed
inthe
articles.
Excellent
tool
toinvesti-
gate
participationin
daily
occupations
ofchildren
with
disabilitiesin
4main
areas:
daily
activities,
social-cognitive,
mobility,
andrespon
sibility.
Goo
dapplicationforre-
search
becausedata
col-
lectioniscompu
terized
andconvenient
forpar-
ticipantswho
areparents.
Applicationto
clinical
practiceandscoring
in-
terpretationunknown—
not
described
inarticle.
Psychom
etrically
and
theoreticallysoun
dcom-
puterizedinstrument.
Prescho
olIm
itationand
PraxisScale(PIPS;
Vanvuchelen,R
oeyers,&
DeWeerdt,20
11)
Purpose:D
escriptive,dis-
criminative,andevaluative
Practicality:H
aveto
ob-
servechild
completingmo-
torskillactivities
andrate
hisor
herperformance
LevelIII
Stage
7:reliability
assessment
May
assist
clinicians
inevaluatingandreevaluat-
ingpreschoolers’imita-
tionability.
Can
beused
toinvestigate
theun
derpinning
sof
mo-
tordevelopm
entor
sen-
sory
processing
.
Can
beused
toevaluate
theeffectivenessof
aninterventionprog
ram
orcouldbe
used
toinvesti-
gate
whether
certaindi-
agno
sticgrou
pspresent
with
distinct
motor
skill
difficulties.
•Novalidity
evidence
repo
rted.
•Doesno
tprovidemuch
inform
ationon
theoc-
cupationalperform
ance
ofchildren.
Promisingpreliminary
reliabilityevidence
isrepo
rted.
Qualityof
LifeinSchool
(QoL
S)Version
2(W
eintraub
&Bar-Haim
Erez,200
9)
Purpose:D
escriptive
Practicality:C
hildrates
howtrue
statem
entsare
abou
thisor
herscho
ol-
relatedQoL
;easyto
administerandscore
LevelIII
Stage
8:very
earlyvalida-
tionstudy
Providesatooltoevaluate
typically
developing
stu-
dents’perceptions
ofschool-relatedQoL.
May
have
immediate
appli-
cationto
studentswith
psycho
socialchalleng
es.
May
beused
toinvestiga-
tetheoretical
underpin-
ningsof
therelationship
betweenoccupationand
QoL
.
May
beused
inresearch
toexploreaspectsof
schoolperformance,sub-
jectivestudentscho
ol-
relatedQoL,andother
culturalor
environm
ental
factors.
•Requiresfurtherrelia-
bilityandvalidity
studies
toensure
thatthetool
discriminates
between
childrenwho
doanddo
notenjoy,participate
well,or
academ
ically
achieveinscho
ol.
•Needs
tobe
validated
for
childrenwith
disability.
Thetool
hasawell-
documentedexplanation
ofits
psychometricdevel-
opmentthatcontributes
totheuser’sconfidenceand
actualrigor
ofthetool.
Schoo
lFun
ctionAssess-
ment(Hwang&Davies,
2009
)
Purpo
se:D
iscriminative,
predictive,andevaluative
Practicality:R
equiresspe-
cialized
skillsto
admin-
ister,score,andinterpret;
basedon
interviewwith
person
who
know
sho
w
LevelIII
Stages8and10
:validity
anddimensionality
assessment
Can
beused
toassess
children’sactivity
perfor-
mance
inaschool
environm
ent.
Isatop-do
wnas-
sessmenttool
that
pro-
videsinform
ationabou
tchildren’sactivity
participation.
•Cou
ldbe
used
toevalu-
atetheeffectivenessof
occupationaltherapy
interventionprog
rams.
•Cou
ldprovideabase-
lineforchildren’sschool-
relatedoccupations.
•Requires
specialized
trainingto
administer
andscore.
•Isqu
itetim
econsum
ing
toadministerandscore.
•Wellestablishedwith
strong
psycho
metric
characteristics.
•Testhasbeen
widely
used.
•Verycompatiblewith
anoccupation-focused
(Con
tinued)
e212 September/October 2014, Volume 68, Number 5
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table3.
Critiqu
eof
Childrenan
dYou
thInstrumen
tDevelop
men
tan
dTe
stingArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
InstrumentandAuthor
Purpose
ofInstrumentand
Practicality
Levelof
Evidence
and
Stage
ofInstrument
Develop
ment
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyPractice
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyTheory
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyResearch
Limitations
ofStudy
Strengths
ofStudy
child
functions
inscho
olenvironm
ent
•Scalebo
okletandman-
ualhavetobe
purchased,
creatingcostissue.
perspectiveon
service
provision.
Schoo
lVersion
ofthe
Assessm
entof
Motor
andProcess
Skills
(Mun
kholm,B
erg,
Lofgren,&Fisher,2
010)
Purpose:D
escriptive,dis-
criminative,predictive,and
evaluative
Practicality:V
alidand
clinicallyusefultoolfor
measuring
thequality
ofscho
olworktask
perfor-
mance
asitisob
served
inthenaturalclassroom
setting
LevelIII
Stages8and10
:validity
assessment
Can
beused
toassess
children’smotor
andpro-
cess
skillsinaclassroom
environm
ent.
•IsaMOHO-based
tool.
•Buildsabo
dyof
know
l-edge
abou
tmotor
and
processskills.
Couldbe
used
toevaluate
theeffectivenessof
occu-
pationaltherapy
interven-
tionprog
ramsor
asan
outcom
emeasure.
Requirescompletionof
a5-daycourse
inwhich
raters
aretrainedand
calibrated;somepo
tential
usersmay
notbe
ableto
afford
thecourse
tuition
fees.
•Well-validated
and
standardized
scale
•Strongevidence
ofdimension
ality
•Assesseschildren’s
motor
andprocess
skillsinanaturalistic
environm
ent.
•Testusershave
tocom-
pleteextensivetraining
course
andbecome
calibratedbefore
using
instrumentindependently.
Sense
andSelf-Regulation
Checklist(Silva&Schalock,
2012)
Purpose:D
escriptive,dis-
criminative,andpredictive
Practicality:E
asily
administeredandscored
parent–caregiver
measure
LevelIII
Stages7and8:
reliability
andvalidity
study
May
have
someapplica-
tionto
clinicaloccupa-
tionaltherapypractice
basedon
abiop
sychoso-
cialor
biom
edicalfram
e-work;
limitedapplication
toothertypesof
clinical
occupationaltherapy
practice.
May
beused
inresearch
tofurtherinvestigatethe
relationships
withinabio-
medicalfram
ework.
May
beused
inresearch
tofurtherinvestigatethe
relationshipam
ongsen-
sory
processing
,behav-
ior,andself-regulation
amongchildrenwith
au-
tism
spectrum
disorder.
Furthervalidationresearch
required
todemonstrate
applicationto
clinicaloc-
cupationaltherapyuse.
Promisinginitial
psycho
-metricprop
erties,
al-
thou
ghfurthervalidity
studiesmight
includ
eand
analyzedata
from
the
perspectiveof
otherchild
andenvironm
ental
variables.
SensoryExperiences
Ques-
tionnaire(SEQ
;Littleetal.,
2011)
Purpose:D
escriptive,
discriminative,and
evaluative
Practicality:S
ensory
processing
LevelIII
Stage
7:reliability
assessment
Can
beused
toassess
childrenpresentingwith
sensoryprocessing
issues.
Providesevidence
abou
tsensoryprocessing
issues;couldprovide
supp
ortforDun
n’sSen-
sory
ProcessingModel.
Couldbe
used
toevaluate
theeffectivenessof
occu-
pationaltherapy
interven-
tionprog
rams.
•Limitedpsycho
metric
datahave
been
published
ontheSEQ
.•Participantsforreliability
studywererecruited
from
1geo
graphic
region.
Brief
parent-reportscale,
minimum
respon
dent
burden
Sensory
ProfileCaregiver
Questionn
aire
(Ohletal.,
2012
)
Purpose:D
escriptive,dis-
criminative,predictive,
andevaluative
Practicality:P
arent-report
scale;tim
econsum
ingto
scoreandinterpret
LevelIII
Stages8and10
:validity
assessment
Can
beusedto
assess
children’ssensory
pro-
cessingskills.
Providesevidence
abou
tchildren’ssensoryproces-
sing
andpotentialcontri-
butions
andhowthiscould
affecttheiroccupational
performance
indaily
contexts.
Couldbe
used
toevaluate
theeffectivenessof
occu-
pationaltherapy
interven-
tionprog
ramsor
asan
outcom
emeasure.
•Manyitemsto
answ
er.
•Limitedvalidity
data
available.
•Scalebo
okletandman-
ualhavetobe
purchased,
creatingcostissue.
•Com
prehensive
coverage
ofsensoryprocessing
issues
inaclassroom
context.
•Asksforparent
and
teacherfeedback.
•Based
onpracticemodel.
(Con
tinued)
The American Journal of Occupational Therapy e213
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table3.
Critiqu
eof
Childrenan
dYou
thInstrumen
tDevelop
men
tan
dTe
stingArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
InstrumentandAuthor
Purpose
ofInstrumentand
Practicality
Levelof
Evidence
and
Stage
ofInstrument
Develop
ment
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyPractice
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyTheory
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyResearch
Limitations
ofStudy
Strengths
ofStudy
Slosson
Visual–Motor
Perform
ance
Test
(Brown,Unsworth,&
Lyons,2009)
Purpo
se:D
iscriminative,
predictive,andevaluative
Practicality:H
aveto
pur-
chasetestbo
okletsand
manual;relativelyeasy
toadministerandscore
LevelIII
Stages8and10
:validity
anddimensionality
assessment
Can
beusedto
assess
child
ren’svisu
al–motor
integrationskills.
Isabo
ttom
-upassess-
menttool
that
pro-
videsinform
ationabou
tchildren’sbo
dyfunctions
andstructures.
Couldbe
used
toevaluate
theeffectivenessof
occu-
pationaltherapy
interven-
tionprog
rams.
•Doesno
tprovideinfor-
mationabou
tchildren’s
occupationalperfor-
man
ce.
•Notwidelyused
byther-
apists.
•Limitedpsycho
metric
datapu
blishedabou
ttestby
externalauthors.
•Scalebo
okletandman-
ualhavetobe
purchased,
creatingcostissue.
Prelim
inaryevidence
ofreliabilityandvalidity
repo
rted
bytest
authors
intestmanualisprom
ising.
Testof
Visual–Motor
In-
tegration(TVMI;Brown,
Unsworth,&
Lyons,2009)
Purpo
se:D
iscriminative,
predictive,andevaluative
Practicality:R
equires
purchase
oftestbo
oklets
andmanual;relatively
easy
toadministerand
score
LevelIII
Stages8and10
:validity
anddimensionality
assessment
Can
beusedto
assess
child
ren’svisu
al–motor
integrationskills.
Isabo
ttom
-upas-
sessmenttool
that
pro-
videsinform
ationabou
tchildren’sbo
dyfunctions
andstructures.
Couldbe
used
toevaluate
theeffectivenessof
oc-
cupationaltherapyin-
terventionprog
ramsor
toestablishthevisual–
motor
baselineskillsof
certaindiagno
sticgrou
psof
clients.
•Doesno
tprovideinfor-
mationabou
tchildren’s
occupationalperfor-
man
ce.
•Notwidelyused
byther-
apists.
•Limitedpsycho
metric
datapu
blishedabou
ttestby
externalauthors.
Prelim
inaryevidence
ofreliabilityandvalidity
repo
rted
bytest
authors
intest
manualis
prom
ising.
TestofVisual–Motor
Skills–R
evised
(TVMS–R
;Brown,Unsworth,&
Lyons,
2009)
Purpo
se:D
iscriminative,
predictive,andevaluative
Practicality:R
equirespur-
chaseoftestbo
okletsand
manual;relativelyeasy
toadministerandscore
LevelIII
Stages8and10
:validity
anddimensionality
assessment
Can
beusedto
assess
child
ren’svisu
al–motor
integrationskills.
Isabo
ttom
-upas-
sessmenttool
that
pro-
videsinform
ationabou
tchildren’sbo
dyfunctions
andstructures.
Couldbe
used
toevaluate
theeffectivenessof
occu-
pationaltherapy
interven-
tionprog
ramsor
toes-
tablishthevisual–m
otor
baselineskillsofcertain
diagnosticgroups
ofclients.
•Doesno
tprovideinfor-
mationabou
tchildren’s
occupationalperfor-
man
ce.
•Limitedpsycho
metric
datapu
blishedabou
ttestby
externalauthors.
•Scalebo
okletandman-
ualhavetobe
purchased,
creatingcostissue.
Prelim
inaryevidence
ofreliabilityandvalidity
repo
rted
bytest
authors
intest
manualis
prom
ising.
Testof
Visual–Perceptual
Skills–R
evised
(TVPS–R
;Tsai,L
in,Liao,
&Hsieh,
2009
)
Purpose:D
escriptive,dis-
criminative,predictive,
andevaluative
Practicality:Fairlystraight-
forwardto
administerand
score
LevelIII
Stages7and10
:reliability
assessment
Can
beused
toestablish
thebaselineof
achild’s
visual–perceptualskills.
Can
beused
toinvestigate
theun
derpinning
sof
per-
ceptualmotor
theory.
Can
beused
toestablish
theeffectivenessof
aninterventionprog
ram
orexplorethelinks
between
visual–perceptualskills
andchildren’soccupational
performance.
•Smallsam
plesize
•Datagathered
in1geo-
graphiclocation.
•Nolinkto
occupational
performance
ofchildren
made.
•Answersheets,testplate
book,and
testmanual
have
tobe
purchased,
creatingcostissue.
•Providesevidence
ofthe
reliabilityprop
ertiesof
theTV
PS–R
.•Providesevidence
for
useof
scaleinacross-
culturalcon
text.
(Con
tinued)
e214 September/October 2014, Volume 68, Number 5
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table3.
Critiqu
eof
Childrenan
dYou
thInstrumen
tDevelop
men
tan
dTe
stingArticlesPub
lished
intheAmerican
Journa
lofO
ccup
ationa
lThe
rapy,Jan
uary
2009
–Sep
tembe
r20
13(con
t.)
InstrumentandAuthor
Purpose
ofInstrumentand
Practicality
Levelof
Evidence
and
Stage
ofInstrument
Develop
ment
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyPractice
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyTheory
Relevance
toOccupational
TherapyResearch
Limitations
ofStudy
Strengths
ofStudy
WeeklyCalendarPlann
ing
Activity
(WCPA;Tog
lia&
Berg,2013;W
einer,Toglia,
&Berg,2012)
Purpose:D
escriptiveand
discriminative
Practicality:R
elatively
easy
toob
tainand
administer;relatively
inexpensiveto
use
LevelIII
Stage
8:validity
anddi-
mensionality
assessment
•Can
beused
toassess
clients’executivefunc-
tioning.
•Cou
ldbe
used
toevalu-
atetheeffectivenessof
aninterventionprogram
forresearch
purposes.
Could
beused
tocon-
tributeto
theories
ofcogn
itive
functioning
orexecutivefunctioning
re-
mediationpracticemodels.
Couldbe
used
toevaluate
theeffectivenessof
in-
terventionprog
ramsthat
target
clients’executive
functionskills.
Convenience
sampling;
recruitm
entof
partic-
ipants
from
1geog
raphic
location,
which
limits
the
generalizability
ofthe
findings;
largesample
size
difference
between
the2participantgrou
ps.
Strengthof
theWCPAis
that
itis
anecolog
ical
assessmentthat
involves
thecompletionof
anev-
eryday
task
(i.e.,entering
appo
intm
ents
into
aweeklyschedu
le).
Note.LevelI5system
aticreview
s,meta-analyses,and
random
ized
controlledtrials;LevelII5two-grou
pno
nrando
mized
pretest–po
sttestdesigns(e.g.,coho
rtdesign
s,case
controlstudies);LevelIII5on
e-groupno
nrando
mized,
noncon
trolledtrials;LevelIV
5single-subjectdesigns,descriptivestudies,andcase
series;LevelV5
expertop
inion,case
study,no
tbased
onsystem
aticresearch
metho
ds.D
CD5
developm
entalcoo
rdinationdisorder;ICF5
InternationalC
lassificationof
Function,
DisabilityandHealth;M
OHO5
Modelof
Hum
anOccup
ation;
PED
I5
PediatricEvaluationof
DisabilityInventory;PEO
5Person–Environm
ent–Occupationmodel;Q
oL5
quality
oflife.
Sug
gested
citation:Brown,T.,&
Bourke-Taylor,H
.(2014
).Centenn
ialVision—
Childrenandyouthinstrumentd
evelopmentand
testingarticlespublishedintheAmerican
JournalofO
ccup
ationalTherapy,200
9–20
13:A
content,
metho
dology,and
instrumentdesign
review
(Table3).A
merican
JournalofOccupationalTherapy,6
8,e154
–e21
6.http://dx.do
i.org/10.50
14/ajot.20
14.01223
7
The American Journal of Occupational Therapy e215
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms
Table 4. Classification of Instruments in the Children and Youth Instrument Development and Testing Articles Published in the AmericanJournal of Occupational Therapy, January 2009–September 2013, by Practice Model
PEO ICF
Instrument Person Environment OccupationBody Functionsand Structures
PersonalFactors
EnvironmentalFactors Activity Participation
Adolescents and Adults Coordination Questionnaire O O
Assessment of Children’s Hand Skills O O O O O O
Assessment of Motor and Process Skills O O O O O O O O
Ayres Sensory Integration Fidelity Measure O O
Box and Block Test O O
Child Occupational Self Assessment O O O O O O O
Children’s Assessment of Participation andEnjoyment/Preferences for Activities of Children
O O O O O O
Children’s Leisure Assessment Scale O O O O O O
Comprehensive Observations of Proprioception O O
Developmental Test of Visual–Motor Integration O O
Do–Eat O O O O
Evaluation of Social Interaction O O O O O O
Evaluation Tool of Children’s Handwriting O O O O
Family L.I.F.E. (Looking Into Family Experiences) O O O O O O
Health Promoting Activities Scale O O O O
Life Participation for Parents O O O O O
Manual Ability Classification System O O
McDonald Play Inventory O O O O
Melbourne Assessment of Unilateral UpperLimb Function
O O
Motor-Free Visual Perception Test–Revised O O
Occupational Self Assessment O O O O O O
Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory–ComputerAdaptive Test
O O O O O O
Pediatric Outcomes Data Collection Instrument O O O
Preschool Imitation and Praxis Scale O O
Quality of Life in School Version 2 O O O O O O O
School Function Assessment O O O O O O O
School Version of the Assessment of Motor andProcess Skills
O O O O O O O
Sense and Self-Regulation Checklist O O
Sensory Experiences Questionnaire O O O O
Sensory Profile Caregiver Questionnaire O O O
Slosson Visual–Motor Performance Test O O
Test of Visual–Motor Integration O O
Test of Visual–Motor Skills–Revised O O
Test of Visual–Perceptual Skills–Revised O O
Weekly Calendar Planning Activity O O O
Note. ICF5 International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (World Health Organization, 2001, 2007); PEO5 Person–Environment–Occupationmodel(Law et al., 1996).
Suggested citation: Brown, T., & Bourke-Taylor, H. (2014). Centennial Vision—Children and youth instrument development and testing articles published in theAmerican Journal of Occupational Therapy, 2009–2013: A content, methodology, and instrument design review (Table 4). American Journal of Occupational Therapy,68, e154–e216. http://dx.doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2014.012237
e216 September/October 2014, Volume 68, Number 5
Downloaded From: http://ajot.aota.org/ on 09/05/2014 Terms of Use: http://AOTA.org/terms