Background. Adequate and user-friendly instruments for assessing physical function and disability in older adults are vital for estimating and predicting health care needs in clinical practice. The Late-Life Function and Disability Instrument Computer Adaptive Test (LLFDICAT) is a promising instrument for assessing physical function and disability in gerontology research and clinical practice. Objective. The aims of this study were: (1) to translate the LLFDI-CAT to the Dutch language and (2) to investigate its validity and reliability in a sample of older adults who spoke Dutch and dwelled in the community. Design. For the assessment of validity of the LLFDI-CAT, a cross-sectional design was used. To assess reliability, measurement of the LLFDI-CAT was repeated in the same sample. Methods. The item bank of the LLFDI-CAT was translated with a forward-backward procedure. A sample of 54 older adults completed the LLFDI-CAT, World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0, RAND 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey physical functioning scale (10 items), and 10-Meter Walk Test. The LLFDI-CAT was repeated in 2 to 8 days (mean4.5 days). Pearson’s r and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) (2,1) were calculated to assess validity, group-level reliability, and participant-level reliability. Results. A correlation of .74 for the LLFDI-CAT function scale and the RAND 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey physical functioning scale (10 items) was found. The correlations of the LLFDI-CAT disability scale with the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 and the 10-Meter Walk Test were .57 and .53, respectively. The ICC (2,1) of the LLFDI-CAT function scale was .84, with a group-level reliability score of .85. The ICC (2,1) of the LLFDI-CAT disability scale was .76, with a group-level reliability score of .81. Limitations. The high percentage of women in the study and the exclusion of older adults with recent joint replacement or hospitalization limit the generalizability of the results. Conclusions. The Dutch LLFDI-CAT showed strong validity and high reliability when used to assess physical function and disability in older adults dwelling in the community.
MULTIFILE
‘Creating the Difference’ is the theme of the 2014 edition of the Chi Sparks conference. It is also the challenge that the Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) community is facing today. HCI is a creative field where practitioners engage in design, production, and evaluation of interactions between people and digital technology. Creating excellent interfaces for people, they make a difference in media and systems that people are eager to use. Usability and user experience are fundamental for achieving this, as are abilities at the forefront of technology, but key to a successful difference is getting the right concepts, addressing genuine, intrinsic, human needs. Researchers and practitioners contribute to this area from theory as well as practice by sharing, discussing, and demonstrating new ideas and developments. This is how HCI creates a difference for society, for individuals, businesses, education, and organizations. The difference that an interactive product or service makes might lie in the concept of it but also in the making, the creation of details and the realisation. It is through powerful concepts and exceptional quality of realisation that innovation is truly achieved. At the Chi Sparks 2014 conference, researchers and practitioners in the HCI community convene to share and discuss their efforts on researching and developing methods, techniques, products, and services that enable people to have better interactions with systems and other people. The conference is hosted at The Hague University of Applied Sciences, and proudly built upon the previous conferences in Arnhem (2011) and Leiden (2009). Copyright van de individuele papers ligt bij de betreffende auteurs.
Blended learning, a teaching format in which face-to-face and online learning is integrated, nowadays is an important development in education. Little is known, however, about its affordances for teacher education, and for domain specific didactical courses in particular. To investigate this topic, we carried out a design research project in which teacher educators engaged in a co-design process of developing and field-testing open online learning units for mathematics and science didactics. The preliminary results concern descriptions of the work processes by the design teams, of design heuristics, and of typical ways of collaborating. These findings are illustrated for the case of two of the designed online units on statistics didactics and mathematical thinking, respectively.
LINK
