Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 374

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Goal setting as an outcome measure: a systematic review

Hurn, Jane, Kneebone, Ian, Cropley, Mark·2006·Clinical Rehabilitation

Abstract

Background: Goal achievement has been considered to be an important measure of outcome by clinicians working with patients in physical and neurological rehabilitation settings. This systematic review was undertaken to examine the reliability, validity and sensitivity of goal setting and goal attainment scaling approaches when used with working age and older people. Aims and objectives: To review the reliability, validity and sensitivity of both goal setting and goal attainment scaling when employed as an outcome measure within a physical and neurological working age and older person rehabilitation environment, by examining the research literature covering the 36 years since goal-setting theory was proposed. Methods: Data sources included a computer-aided literature search of published studies examining the reliability, validity and sensitivity of goal setting/goal attainment scaling, with further references sourced from articles obtained through this process. Main findings: There is strong evidence for the reliability, validity and sensitivity of goal attainment scaling. Empirical support was found for the validity of goal setting but research demonstrating its reliability and sensitivity is limited. Conclusions: Goal attainment scaling appears to be a sound measure for use in physical rehabilitation settings with working age and older people. Further work needs to be carried out with goal setting to establish its reliability and sensitivity as a measurement tool.

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 · 10.1177/0269215506070793

Cites

3 of 3 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

Cited by

See all 374

Metadata

Authors
Hurn, J., Kneebone, I., & Cropley, M.
Venue
Clinical Rehabilitation
Published
2006-09
Volume
20
Issue
9
Pages
756-772
ISSN
  • 0269-2155 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-0873
OpenAlex
W2162855396
Cited by
374
References
3
FWCI
2.88
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: Goal setting as an outcome measure: a systematic review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0269215506070793
The paper
Hurn, J., Kneebone, I., & Cropley, M. (2006). Goal setting as an outcome measure: a systematic review. Clinical Rehabilitation. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269215506070793

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.