Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • 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
Structured Multidisciplinary work Evaluation Tool: Development and validation of a multidisciplinary work questionnaire
Värnamo Sjukhus, Arbetsmiljoenheten.
Värnamo Sjukhus, Arbetsmiljoenheten.
Värnamo Sjukhus, Arbetsmiljoenheten.
Värnamo Hospital, Samrehab.
Number of Authors: 3
2016 (English)In: Work: A journal of Prevention, Assesment and rehabilitation, ISSN 1051-9815, E-ISSN 1875-9270, Vol. 55, no 4, 883-891 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

BACKGROUND: Important success factors for the Occupational Health Service (OHS) include services being based on active participation and risk identification from a multidisciplinary/multifactorial perspective. Despite an extensive search, no questionnaire with this approach was found so a new questionnaire was developed at the OHS. The aim of this study was to develop and validate the new questionnaire named Structured Multidisciplinary work Evaluation Tool (SMET) through action research. METHOD: Communicative and pragmatic validity were tested through the development of the questionnaire using action theory and presented in a descriptive portrayal. The Content Validity Index (CVI) was used to test content validity for each item as well as for the questionnaire as a whole. RESULT: Communicative and pragmatic validity were developed and tested over time in four different periods between 2008 and 2014, in 24 clinics (with a total of approximately 1000 employees) in Region Jonkoping County. The content validity of the SMET questionnaire as a whole was close to excellent and the validity of the questions regarding physically and psychosocially demanding work factors were found to be excellent. The questions regarding environmentally demanding work factors were found to have a lower, but still good, validity. CONCLUSION: The SMET questionnaire has very good content validity. The pervasive work with the SMET questionnaire also shows good pragmatic and communicative validity.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2016. Vol. 55, no 4, 883-891 p.
National Category
Physiotherapy
Research subject
Physiotherapy
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ltu:diva-62729DOI: 10.3233/WOR-162454OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ltu-62729DiVA: diva2:1085104
Available from: 2017-03-28 Created: 2017-03-28 Last updated: 2017-03-28Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Areskoug Josefsson, Kristina
In the same journal
Work: A journal of Prevention, Assesment and rehabilitation
Physiotherapy

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 16 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • 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