Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 272

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Validity and Community Utility of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure

McColl, Mary Ann, Paterson, Margo, Davies, Diane, Doubt, Lorna, Law, Mary·2000·Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy

Abstract

This study addressed the validity and community utility of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) (Law et al., 1991; 1994; 1998): a measure that now represents a national standard in clinical practice and research in occupational therapy in Canada. The study employed a crosssectional design. Participants for the study were former consumers of occupational therapy services, recruited from the Queen's University catchment area (Kingston, North Bay, Oshawa, Perth, Peterborough). A sample of 61 disabled individuals living in the community were recruited. Each individual was sent a package of self-administered measures including the Satisfaction with Performance Scaled Questionnaire, the Reintegration to Normal Living Index, the Life Satisfaction Questionnaire, and the Perceived Problems List. An interview was also arranged with the project coordinator, which was based on the COPM and the Consumer Utility Questionnaire. Multivariate analyses showed that construct validity was supported; scores on the COPM were significantly related to theoretically related constructs: satisfaction with performance, reintegration to normal living and life satisfaction. In addition, criterion validity was supported. A majority of participants (53%), when asked about problems of daily living, spontaneously reported at least one of the problems raised on the COPM. Community utility was evaluated highly by participants, 75% of whom found the COPM useful in identifying and rating their problems, and 100% of whom reported no problems in understanding the COPM.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/000841740006700105

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 18 references

Cited by

See all 272

Metadata

Authors
McColl, M. A., Paterson, M., Davies, D., Doubt, L., & Law, M.
Venue
Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy
Published
2000-02
Volume
67
Issue
1
Pages
22-30
ISSN
  • 0008-4174 (ISSN-L)
  • 1911-9828
OpenAlex
W2030551727
Cited by
272
References
18
FWCI
26.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Validity and Community Utility of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/000841740006700105
The paper
McColl, M. A., Paterson, M., Davies, D., Doubt, L., & Law, M. (2000). Validity and Community Utility of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy. https://doi.org/10.1177/000841740006700105

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.