A review of the literature related to in-hand manipulation (IHM) revealed that there is no assessment which specifically measures this construct in the adult population. This study reports the face and content validity of an IHM assessment for adults with impaired hand function based on expert opinion.
The definition of IHM skills, assessment tasks and scoring methods identified from literature was discussed in a focus group (n = 4) to establish face validity. An expert panel (n = 16) reviewed the content validity of the proposed assessment; evaluating the representativeness and relevance of encompassing the IHM skills in the proposed assessment tasks, the clarity and importance to daily life of the task and the clarity and applicability to clinical environment of the scoring method. The content validity was calculated using the content validity index for both the individual task and all tasks together (I-CVI and S-CVI). Feedback was incorporated to create the assessment.
The focus group members agreed to include 10 assessment tasks that covered all IHM skills. In the expert panel review, all tasks received an I-CVI above 0.78 and S-CVI above 0.80 in representativeness and relevance ratings, representing good content validity. With the comments from the expert panel, tasks were modified to improve the clarity and importance to daily life. A four-point Likert scale was identified for assessing both the completion of the assessment tasks and the quality of IHM skills within the task performance.
Face and content validity were established in this new IHM assessment. Further studies to examine psychometric properties and use within clinical practice are recommended.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 July 2018.
All research outputs
#16,642,310
of 24,484,013 outputs
Outputs from Australian Occupational Therapy Journal
#520
of 713 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#280,128
of 451,084 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Australian Occupational Therapy Journal
#16
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,484,013 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 713 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 451,084 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
