The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Further validation of the Child and Adolescent Scale of Participation (CASP)
Abstract
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To further validate the Child and Adolescent Scale of Participation (CASP) for children and youth with acquired brain injuries and other disabling conditions. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A cross-sectional design was used. Data were collected on 313 children and youth, aged 3-22, with and without disabling conditions. Children with acquired brain injuries (ABI) were the largest group (56%). Cronbach's alpha, factor analyses and Rasch analyses were used to examine internal scale consistency and structure. Correlation analyses were conducted to examine associations between CASP scores and scores that reflect extent of impairment and impact of environmental barriers. Independent t-tests or analyses of variance were used to examine mean differences in CASP scores in relation to sex, age and disability groups. MAIN OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: Children without disabilities had significantly greater extent of participation (higher CASP scores) than children with disabilities. Greater extent of participation was associated with lesser extent of impairment and environmental barriers. Evidence of internal consistency and internal structure validity was demonstrated. Factor analyses showed that items from similar domains loaded onto one of three factors and a large (63%) proportion of variance was explained. Rasch analyses revealed essentially one unidimensional construct. The item difficulty order closely matched the expected pattern of life situations that children would find more to less challenging to participate in. CONCLUSIONS: Findings were similar to prior research and suggested that the CASP is a promising new measure of participation. However, study design features limit generalizations and definitive conclusions that can be made. Future research is needed to assess the ability of the CASP to detect change over time and to include a larger and more diverse sample.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cognitive psychology and self-reports: Models and methods
Jobe, J. B. (2003) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1023/a:1023279029852 · Cited by 214
Cited by
Tham, S. W., Palermo, T. M., Vavilala, M. S., Wang, J., Jaffe, K. M., Koepsell, T. D., Dorsch, A., Temkin, N., Durbin, D., & Rivara, F. P. (2012) · Journal of Neurotrauma · doi:10.1089/neu.2011.2126 · Cited by 109
Chang, Y.-C., Chen, C.-H., Huang, P.-C., & Lin, L.-Y. (2019) · Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy · doi:10.1080/11038128.2018.1449887 · Cited by 46
Metadata
- Authors
- Bedell, G.
- Venue
- Developmental Neurorehabilitation
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2009-01
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 342-351
- ISSN
- 1363-8491 (ISSN-L)
- 1751-8423
- 1751-8431
- OpenAlex
- W2145431900
- Cited by
- 188
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 1.48
- 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
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.