A clinician's guide to work-related assessments: 3 – Administration and interpretation problems

Article type: Research Article

Authors: Innes, Ev^; | Straker, Leon

Affiliations: School of Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, The University of Sydney, PO Box 170, Lidcombe, NSW 2141, Australia | School of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University of Technology, Shenton Park, WA, Australia

Note: [] Corresponding author. Tel.: + 61 2 93519209, fax: + 61 2 93519197. e-mail: [email protected]

Abstract: This paper is the third of a series aimed at providing clinicians with a guide to assist them in using work-related assessments appropriately. The major administration and interpretation problems facing clinicians using work-related assessments are described in detail. Administration problems are: (1) insufficient evidence of reliability and validity; and (2) potential examiner bias. Interpretation problems are: (1) inappropriate use of norm and criterion-referenced data; (2) inappropriate statistical manipulation of results; (3) difficulty in determining end-point; and (4) difficulty determining sincerity of effort. Companion papers describe the purposes of work-related assessments, and design problems in detail.

Keywords: Occupational rehabilitation, Work-related assessment, Work assessment, Functional capacity evaluation, Sincerity of effort, Normative data, Criterion-referenced assessment

DOI: 10.3233/WOR-1998-11210

Journal: Work, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 207-219, 1998