Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Keele Assessment of Participation: A New Instrument to Measure Participation Restriction in Population Studies. Combined Qualitative and Quantitative Examination of its Psychometric Properties

  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The World Health Organization has proposed participation restriction to reflect the societal consequences of health conditions. Despite its importance, participation restriction appears to be inconsistently represented or absent from the content of many health status instruments. This paper describes the development and testing of a new self-complete measure of participation restriction from the conceptual basis of participation as an individual’s perception of their actual involvement in life situations. The psychometric properties (face, content and construct validity, responder burden, performance and repeatability) of the instrument were examined using qualitative and quantitative methods. Person-perceived participation restriction did not reflect the frequency of participation but was associated with participants’ expectations, aspirations, and needs, as well as contextual factors. We conclude that the instrument can provide estimates of person-perceived participation restriction in population surveys.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2001

  2. JE Bickenbach S Chatterji EM Badley TB. Ustun (1999) ArticleTitleModels of disablement, universalism and the international classification of impairments, disabilities and handicaps Soc Sci Med 48 1173–1187 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0277-9536(98)00441-9 Occurrence Handle10220018

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. R. Marks (1999) Disability: Controversial Debates and Psychosocial Perspectives Routledge London

    Google Scholar 

  4. S. Ebrahim (1997) ArticleTitlePublic health implications of ageing J Epidemiol Community Health 51 469–471 Occurrence Handle9425453

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. RH Harwood M Prince A Mann S. Ebrahim (1998) ArticleTitleAssociations between diagnoses, impairments, disability and handicap in a population of elderly people Int J Epidemiol 27 261–268 Occurrence Handle10.1093/ije/27.2.261 Occurrence Handle9602408

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. G Stucki A Cieza T Ewert N Kostanjsek S Chatterji TB. Ustun (2002) ArticleTitleApplication of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) in clinical practice Disabil Rehabil 24 281–282 Occurrence Handle10.1080/09638280110105222 Occurrence Handle12004974

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. G Grimby B. Smedby (2001) ArticleTitleICF approved as the successor of ICIDH J Rehabil Med 33 193–194 Occurrence Handle10.1080/165019701750419545 Occurrence Handle11585148

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. EM. Badley (1995) ArticleTitleThe genesis of handicap: Definition, models of disablement, and the role of external factors Disabil Rehabil 17 53–62 Occurrence Handle7795260

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. LM Verbrugge A. Jette (1994) ArticleTitleThe disablement process Soc Sci Med 38 1–14 Occurrence Handle10.1016/0277-9536(94)90294-1 Occurrence Handle8146699

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. RH Harwood AJ Carr PW Thompson S. Ebrahim (1996) ArticleTitleHandicap in inflammatory arthritis Br J Rheumatol 35 891–897 Occurrence Handle8810674

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. RH Harwood S Jitapunkul E Dickinson S. Ebrahim (1994) ArticleTitleMeasuring handicap: Motives, methods, and a model Qual Health Care 3 53–57 Occurrence Handle10171957

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. AJ. Carr (1996) ArticleTitleA patient-centred approach to evaluation and treatment in rheumatoid arthritis: the development of a clinical tool to measure patient-perceived handicap Br J Rheumatol 35 921–932 Occurrence Handle10.1093/rheumatology/35.10.921 Occurrence Handle8883429

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. JE. Ware (2003) ArticleTitleConceptualization and measurement of health-related quality of Life: Comments on an evolving field Arch phys Med Rehabil 84 S43–S51 Occurrence Handle10.1053/apmr.2003.50246 Occurrence Handle12692771

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. R Wilkie G Peat E Thomas PR. Croft (2004) ArticleTitleMeasuring the consequences of osteoarthritis and joint pain in population-based studies. Can existing health measurement instruments capture levels of participation? Arthritis Rheum 51 755–762 Occurrence Handle10.1002/art.20703 Occurrence Handle15478153

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. J Fransen D Uebelhart G Stucki T Langenegger M Seitz BA. Michel (2002) ArticleTitleThe ICIDH-2 as a framework for the assessment of functioning and disability in rheumatoid arthritis Ann Rheum Dis 61 225–231 Occurrence Handle10.1136/ard.61.3.225 Occurrence Handle11830427

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. M Weigl A Cieza M Harder et al. (2003) ArticleTitleLinking osteoarthritis-specific health measures to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) Osteoathritis Cartilage 11 519–523 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S1063-4584(03)00086-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. World Health Organization. World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II (WHO DAS II). URL: http://www.who.int/icidh/whodas/ (accessed March 2004)

  18. S Ueda Y. Okawa (2003) ArticleTitleThe subjective dimension of functioning and disability: What is it and what is it for? Disabil Rehabil 25 596–601 Occurrence Handle10.1080/0963828031000137108 Occurrence Handle12959333

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. JH Abramson ZH. Abramson (1999) Survey Methods in Community Medicine EditionNumber5 Epidemiological Research Programme Evaluation

    Google Scholar 

  20. KN Lohr NK Aaronson J Alonso et al. (1996) ArticleTitleEvaluating quality of life and health status instruments: Development of scientific review criteria Clin Ther 18 979–992 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0149-2918(96)80054-3 Occurrence Handle8930436

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. S. Mallinson (2002) ArticleTitleListening to respondents: A qualitative assessment of the Short-Form 36 Health Status Questionnaire Soc Sci Med 54 11–21 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0277-9536(01)00003-X Occurrence Handle11820675

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. JR Landis GG. Koch (1977) ArticleTitleThe measurement of observer agreement for categorical data Biometrics 33 159–174 Occurrence Handle843571

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. M Cardol RJ Haan Particlede BA Jong Particlede GAM Bos Particlevan den IJM. Groot Particlede (2001) ArticleTitlePsychometric properties of the Impact on Participation and Autonomy questionnaire Arch Phys Med Rehabil 82 210–216 Occurrence Handle10.1053/apmr.2001.18218 Occurrence Handle11239312

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. SL Wood-Dauphinee MA Opzoomer JI Williams B Marchand WO. Spitzer (1988) ArticleTitleAssessment of global function: The Reintegration to Normal Living Index Arch Phys Med Rehabil 69 583–590 Occurrence Handle3408328

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. RH Harwood MJ Prince AH Mann S. Ebrahim (1998) ArticleTitleThe prevalence of diagnoses, impairments, disabilities and handicaps in a population of elderly people living in a defined geographical area: The Gospel Oak project Age Ageing 27 707–714 Occurrence Handle10408665

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. FK. Hoehler (2000) ArticleTitleBias and prevalence effects on kappa viewed in terms of sensitivity and specificity J Clin Epidemiol 53 499–503 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00174-2 Occurrence Handle10812322

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. I McDowell C. Newell (1996) Measuring Health. A Guide to Rating Scales and Questionnaires EditionNumber2 Oxford University Press Oxford

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Primary Care Sciences Research Centre, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire ST5 5BG, United Kingdom

    Ross Wilkie, George Peat, Elaine Thomas, Helen Hooper & Peter R. Croft

Authors
  1. Ross Wilkie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. George Peat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Elaine Thomas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Helen Hooper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Peter R. Croft
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ross Wilkie.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wilkie, R., Peat, G., Thomas, E. et al. The Keele Assessment of Participation: A New Instrument to Measure Participation Restriction in Population Studies. Combined Qualitative and Quantitative Examination of its Psychometric Properties. Qual Life Res 14, 1889–1899 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-005-4325-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-005-4325-2

Keywords:

Search

Navigation