| MEASUREMENT PROPERTIES | |
| Limitations | >=5 European languages (English) |
| Observations | |
| 1. RELIABILITY | |
| A. Internal Consistency | Tested |
| Cronbach's (Describe) |
0,56 for performance and 0,71 for satisfaction (Bosch, 1995) |
| B. Reliability intraobserver or test-retest | Tested |
| Continuous scores: intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) Dichotomus: Cohen kappa (Describe) |
Acceptable range for both performance and satisfaction: 0.63 and 0.84 (Sanfrod, Law, et al, 1994); 0,79 and 0,75 (Law and Stewart, 1996); 0,80 and 0,89 (Bosch, 1995); 0,67 (95% CI 0,54-0,78) and 0,69 (95% CI 0,56-0,79) (Eyssen, 2004) |
| C. Reliability interobserver or Measurement error | Not Tested |
| Standard error of measurement (SEM), smallest detectable change (SDC) or Limits of agreement (LoA) (Describe) |
|
| 2. VALIDITY | |
| A. Content validity: face validity | Tested |
| Expert opinion (relevance and comprehensiveness) (Describe) |
The COPM process identifies activity problems across all occupational problems across all occupational performance areas. Is developed in consultation with the Department of national Health and Welfare and the Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists Task Force. |
| B. Construct Validity: Structural validity |
Not Tested |
| Hypotheses-testing | Tested |
| Cross-cultural validity | Not Tested |
| Brief Description | |
| C. Criterion validity | Tested |
| Comparison with a 'gold standard' Continuous scores: correlations, ROC curves Dichotomus: Sensitivity & Specificity (Describe) |
McColl, 2000: COPM problems where similar to to spontaneously reported problems ("where are the five most important problems that you experience with daily living?"). Bosch, 1995: evidence of moderate levels of criterion and construct validity through relationships between the COPM and SF-36 + the SAILS (Mahurin, Bettignies & Pirozzolo, 1991). Chan and Lee, 1997: showed correlations below .40 between the COPM and the Functional Independence Measure (Keith et al, 1987). |