TY - JOUR
T1 - Toward a taxonomy of rehabilitation interventions
T2 - Using an inductive approach to examine the "black box" of rehabilitation
AU - DeJong, Gerben
AU - Horn, Susan D.
AU - Gassaway, Julie A.
AU - Slavin, Mary D.
AU - Dijkers, Marcel P.
N1 - Funding Information:
Supported by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (grant no. H133B990005) and the US Army & Materiel Command (cooperative agreement award no. DAMD17-02-2-0032). The views, opinions, and/or findings contained in this article are those of the authors and should not be construed as an official US Department of the Army position, policy, or decision unless so designated by other documentation.
PY - 2004/4
Y1 - 2004/4
N2 - DeJong G, Horn SD, Gassaway JA, Slavin MD, Dijkers MP. Toward a taxonomy of rehabilitation interventions: using an inductive approach to examine the "black box" of rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004;85:678-86. A barrier in outcomes and effectiveness research is the ability to characterize the interventions under review. This has been the case especially in rehabilitation in which interventions are commonly multidisciplinary, customized to the patient, and lack standardization in definition and measurement. This commentary describes how investigators and clinicians, working together, in a major multisite stroke rehabilitation outcome study were able to define and characterize diverse stroke rehabilitation interventions in a comprehensive, yet parsimonious, fashion and thus capture what actually transpires in a hospital-based stroke rehabilitation program. We consider the implications of the study's classification system for a more comprehensive taxonomy of rehabilitation interventions and the potential utility of such a taxonomy in operationalizing practice standards, medical record keeping, and rehabilitation research.
AB - DeJong G, Horn SD, Gassaway JA, Slavin MD, Dijkers MP. Toward a taxonomy of rehabilitation interventions: using an inductive approach to examine the "black box" of rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004;85:678-86. A barrier in outcomes and effectiveness research is the ability to characterize the interventions under review. This has been the case especially in rehabilitation in which interventions are commonly multidisciplinary, customized to the patient, and lack standardization in definition and measurement. This commentary describes how investigators and clinicians, working together, in a major multisite stroke rehabilitation outcome study were able to define and characterize diverse stroke rehabilitation interventions in a comprehensive, yet parsimonious, fashion and thus capture what actually transpires in a hospital-based stroke rehabilitation program. We consider the implications of the study's classification system for a more comprehensive taxonomy of rehabilitation interventions and the potential utility of such a taxonomy in operationalizing practice standards, medical record keeping, and rehabilitation research.
KW - Classification
KW - Rehabilitation
KW - Taxonomy
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/2342527792
U2 - 10.1016/j.apmr.2003.06.033
DO - 10.1016/j.apmr.2003.06.033
M3 - Comment/debate
C2 - 15083447
AN - SCOPUS:2342527792
SN - 0003-9993
VL - 85
SP - 678
EP - 686
JO - Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
JF - Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
IS - 4
ER -