↓ Skip to main content

Validity of the AusTOM scales: A comparison of the AusTOMs and EuroQol-5D

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, November 2004
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Validity of the AusTOM scales: A comparison of the AusTOMs and EuroQol-5D
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, November 2004
DOI 10.1186/1477-7525-2-64
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carolyn A Unsworth, Stephen J Duckett, Dianne Duncombe, Alison Perry, Jemma Skeat, Nicholas Taylor

Abstract

Clinicians require brief outcome measures in their busy daily practice to document global client outcomes. Based on the UK Therapy Outcome Measure, the Australian Therapy Outcome Measures were designed to capture global therapy outcomes of occupational therapy, physiotherapy and speech pathology in the Australian clinical context. The aim of this study was to investigate the construct (convergent) validity of the Australian Therapy Outcome Measures (AusTOMs) by comparing it with the EuroQuol-5D (EQ-5D). The research was a prospective, longitudinal cohort study, with data collected over a seven month time period. The study was conducted at a total of 13 metropolitan and rural health-care sites including acute, sub-acute and community facilities. Two-hundred and five clients were asked to score themselves on the EQ-5D, and the same clients were scored by approximately 115 therapists (physiotherapists, speech pathologists and occupational therapists) using the AusTOMs at admission and discharge. Clients were consecutive admissions who agreed to participate in the study. Clients of all diagnoses, aged 18 years and over (a criteria of the EQ-5D), and able to give informed consent were scored on the measures. Spearman rank order correlation coefficients were used to analyze the relationships between scores from the two tools. The clients were scored on the AusTOMs and EQ-5D. There were many health care areas where correlations were expected and found between scores on the AusTOMs and the EQ-5D. In the quest to measure the effectiveness of therapy services, managers, health care founders and clinicians are urgently seeking to undertake the first step by identifying tools that can measure therapy outcome. AusTOMs is one tool that can measure global client outcomes following therapy. In this study, it was found that on the whole, the AusTOMs and the EQ-5D measure similar constructs. Hence, although the validity of a tool is never 'proven', this study offers preliminary support for the construct validity of AusTOMs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 5%
Australia 1 2%
Unknown 62 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 18%
Researcher 9 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 14%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Other 5 8%
Other 12 18%
Unknown 14 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 27%
Social Sciences 7 11%
Psychology 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 14 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 26 October 2015.
All research outputs
#16,580,596
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1,360
of 2,297 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,066
of 70,353 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#5
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,297 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 70,353 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.