mdh.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Begreppsvaliditet för bedömningsinstrumentet Reasoning 4 change: En jämförelse av det kliniska resonemanget hos fysioterapeutstudenter i termin ett och termin sex
Mälardalen University, School of Health, Care and Social Welfare.
Mälardalen University, School of Health, Care and Social Welfare.
2018 (Swedish)Independent thesis Basic level (degree of Bachelor), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesis
Abstract [sv]

Bakgrund: Väl undersökta psykometriska egenskaper krävs för att använda ett instrument. Instrumentet Reasoning 4 Change (R4C) begreppsvaliditet behöver stärkas. Den kan undersökas genom att jämföra det kliniska resonemanget hos extrema grupper vilka kan vara fysioterapeutstudenter med beteendemedicinsk inriktning i olika skeden av utbildningen. Utifrån den social kognitiva teorin kan fysioterapeutstudenterna ses som en viktig omgivningsfaktor för att hjälpa patienter utföra en beteendeförändring.

Syfte: Att utvärdera begreppsvalididet för bedömningsinstrumentet R4C genom att jämföra det kliniska resonemanget med fokus på patienters aktivitetsrelaterade beteende och beteendeförändring hos fysioterapeutsstudenter i termin ett och termin sex mätt med instrumentet.

Metod: En beskrivande och jämförande tvärsnittsstudie som utgår från data insamlad ifrån flera tillfällen. Totalt deltog 89 termin ett studenter och 47 termin sex studenter. Parametriskt oberoende t-test användes för att analysera resultatet.

Resultat: Termin sex studenterna hade signifikant högre resultat på sju av åtta variabler mätt med R4C jämfört med termin ett studenterna, vilket innebar att hypotesen nästan fullständigt bekräftades.

Slutsats: Begreppsvaliditeten kan anses som god för den undersökta populationen. För att generalisering till alla fysioterapeutstudenter ska kunna ske behövs vidare forskning.  

Abstract [en]

Background: Evaluation of psychometric properties are necessary to use an instrument. The Reasoning 4 Change (R4C) instrument’s construct validity needs to be strengthened. It can be done by comparing the clinical reasoning by extreme groups which can be physiotherapy students with a behavioral approach in different stages of the education. From the social cognitive theory's perspective, the students can be an important environmental factor to help clients’ perform a behavioral-change.

Aim: To evaluate construct validity for the R4C instrument by comparing the clinical reasoning with focus on clients’ activity-related behaviour and behaviour change by physiotherapy students in the first and sixth semester measured with the instrument.

Method: A describing and comparing cross-sectional study with data collected from several occasions. A total of 89 first semester students and 47 sixth semester students participated in the study. Parametric independent t-test was used to analyse the results.

Result: Students in the sixth semester had significant higher results on seven out of eight variables measured with R4C compared with students in the first semester, that indicate that the hypothesis almost is confirmed.

Conclusion: The construct validity can be considered good for the evaluated population. To be able to generalize to all physiotherapy students more studies would be necessary.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2018. , p. 43
Keywords [en]
Clinical reasoning, construct validity, decision making, physiotherapy, reliability
Keywords [sv]
Begreppsvaliditet, beslutsfattning, fysioterapi, kliniskt resonemang, reliabilitet
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-43038OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mdh-43038DiVA, id: diva2:1303191
Subject / course
Physiotherapy
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2019-04-09 Created: 2019-04-09 Last updated: 2019-04-09Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(704 kB)81 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 704 kBChecksum SHA-512
395d14d318b2e9468a36d8a46802c66484d025abb50866a042b839a1f23b4f93b3918f306f10c0811cb48fd5ecfd9a46538a6a70a637442856bfd0ace88f5be5
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
School of Health, Care and Social Welfare
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 81 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 132 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf