The Development of a Measurement Tool Evaluating Knowledge Related to Sensory Processing among Graduate Occupational Therapy Students: A Process Description.
Bryan M Gee, Kelly Thompson, Jane Strickland and 1 others
PMID 29097978WHAT IT FOUND
A new online test for teaching sensory processing reasoning to OT students showed poor reliability.
Students liked the case-based format but found the time limit restrictive. The tool needs revision before it can be used to assess clinical reasoning.
Key findings
01The overall internal consistency of the new measure was low to moderate, with some specific categories showing very poor or negative consistency.
02Students rated their experience with the measure favorably but not strongly, citing the novel online format and strict time limits as factors.
03The development process involved expert consensus to validate intervention strategies, but achieving agreement among experienced clinicians was difficult.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study is a process description and pilot, not a validation study. The sample size for reliability testing was extremely small (n=8 students). The measure's content is based on the 'A SECRET' reasoning approach, which is one specific model. Expert disagreement on strategy rankings suggests that clinical reasoning in this area may not be as standardized as the tool implies. The strict time limits and inability to re-watch the video were intentional design choices to mimic practice, but they may have negatively impacted students' ability to demonstrate their knowledge, confounding the results. The paper does not report whether the students had prior training in the A SECRET model, which would affect their performance.
Declared interests
No specific funding or conflicts of interest are mentioned in the provided text.
The easy way to misread this
Do not use this measure to assess student competence or make grading decisions. The internal consistency was poor to negative in several key categories, and the pilot sample was only eight students. The authors themselves state the low-scoring questions will be revised.