Children s Assessment of Participation and Enjoyment & Activities of Children (CAPE)

Similar documents
Family Assessment Device (FAD)

Early Childhood Measurement and Evaluation Tool Review

WHO Quality of Life. health other than the cause of a disease or the side effects that come along with it. These other

DESIGN TYPE AND LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Randomized controlled trial, Level I

Chapter 1. Overview. General Description. Test Developers. Purpose and Use. Qualifications of Users. Limitations. Communication. General Description

THE ESSENTIAL BRAIN INJURY GUIDE

Benefits and Features

Cleveland Scale for Activities of Daily Living (CSADL)

Transitions in Mental Health

Implementation supports manual Chronic pain assessment toolbox for children with disabilities

Smiley Faces: Scales Measurement for Children Assessment

QUALITY OF LIFE ASSESSMENT KIT

QUALITY OF LIFE OF MOTHERS HAVING CHILDREN WITH AUTISTIC SPECTRUM DISORDERS AND LEARNING DISABILITIES

insight. Psychological tests to help support your work with medical patients

Meaning and measurement. Dr Mark Wilberforce, Senior Research Fellow. Contemporary Issues in Mental Health Seminar Series, 17 May 2018

Aggregate Assessment Report Summary. March 15, Adaptive Behaviour Scale Residential and Community (ABS-RC: 2) January 2005 December 2015

Participation in play and leisure occupations in children who have a sibling with autism

The Occupational Therapy Role at the Stratford Family Health Team

Patient Sticky Label. A Resource Guide for Stroke Survivors and their Caregivers

Attention STAR Providers: Physical, Occupational, and Speech Therapy Benefits for All Ages to Change for Texas Medicaid September 1, 2017

PsychCorp products are now part of Pearson

Stroke Rehab Definitions Framework Self-Assessment Tool Acute Integrated Stroke Unit

Copyright is owned by the Author of the thesis. Permission is given for a copy to be downloaded by an individual for the purpose of research and

The Work Practice Questionnaire:

What is Occupational Therapy? Introduction to Occupational Therapy. World Federation of Occupational Therapists 2012

Development and Psychometric Properties of an Assessment for Persons With Intellectual Disability The interrai ID

Champlain Assessment/Outcome Measures Forum February 22, 2010

BRIEF REPORT Test Retest Reliability of the Sensory Profile Caregiver Questionnaire

National Stroke Association s Guide to Choosing Stroke. Rehabilitation Services


Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES)

Instruments for Measuring Repetitive Behaviours.

Children s Depression Scale (CDS)

School Psychology Practitioner Check List Check Your Score & Empower Your Practice

RESEARCH SUMMARY. for the TYPEFINDER. Personality Assessment !!!!!! Molly Owens, MA, and Andrew D. Carson, PhD. Truity Psychometrics LLC

Critical Evaluation of the Beach Center Family Quality of Life Scale (FQOL-Scale)

CRITICALLY APPRAISED PAPER (CAP)

Effect of musical activity on participation of Tehran s 6-12 years old Autistic children in formal & informal activities

Cannabis. Screening and Action Planning Toolkit. A toolkit for those who are concerned about their cannabis use and those who support them.

Questionnaire on Anticipated Discrimination (QUAD)(1): is a self-complete measure comprising 14 items

Teaching/Learning Strategies

A proposal for collaboration between the Psychometrics Committee and the Association of Test Publishers of South Africa

A dissertation by. Clare Rachel Watsford

The Guernsey Community & Leisure Participation Assessment revised (GCPLA-r) Manual

Disclosure. Your Presenter. Amy Patenaude, Ed.S., NCSP. 1(800) x331 1

Aging Mastery Program Qualifications for Older Americans Act Title III-D Funding May 2018

CRITICALLY APPRAISED PAPER (CAP)

ADHD Guidance September 2013

3/29/2012. Chapter 7 Measurement of Variables: Scales, Reliability and Validity. Scales. Scale

Assessing Social and Emotional Development in Head Start: Implications for Behavioral Assessment and Intervention with Young Children

Conners CPT 3, Conners CATA, and Conners K-CPT 2 : Introduction and Application

Download Occupational Therapy Toolkit: Treatment Guides And Handouts Books

VALIDATION OF TWO BODY IMAGE MEASURES FOR MEN AND WOMEN. Shayna A. Rusticus Anita M. Hubley University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada

Participation of children on the autism spectrum in home, school, and community

10/18/2016. Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, Third Edition 1. Meet Dr. Saulnier. Bio. Celine A. Saulnier, PhD Vineland-3 Author

1. Can self-propel, or use their foot to push (punt), a standard manual wheelchair 1 and be safe and able to do essential daily tasks.

NZ Organised Stroke Rehabilitation Service Specifications (in-patient and community)

They are updated regularly as new NICE guidance is published. To view the latest version of this NICE Pathway see:

Chapter 9. Youth Counseling Impact Scale (YCIS)

CRITICALLY APPRAISED PAPER (CAP)

Final Research Proposal. The issue of Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) use on public lands has become

Clinical utility of the Mellville-Nelson Self- Identified Goals Assessment

DISCUSSION: PHASE ONE THE RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY OF THE MODIFIED SCALES

relationships (i.e., attribution schemal). The I-E Scale Peterborough, Ontario, Canada ROTTER S (1968) Internal-External Locus of Control (I-E) Scale

COMPACT Orientation & Procedure Manual

Assessing Physical Activity and Dietary Intake in Older Adults. Arunkumar Pennathur, PhD Rohini Magham

ACDI. An Inventory of Scientific Findings. (ACDI, ACDI-Corrections Version and ACDI-Corrections Version II) Provided by:

Hope for a better life. And the help and support to get you there.

Employment Background Complete the application information Complete the application information

Using the NWD Integrative Screener as a Data Collection Tool Agency-Level Aggregate Workbook

Developmental Assessment of Young Children Second Edition (DAYC-2) Summary Report

Criteria for Registering as a Developmental Paediatrician

Employment Background Complete the application information Complete the application information

LOTCA Assessment review. Georgina Wrack. University of the Sunshine Coast

COMPREHENSIVE PAIN REHABILITATION CENTER OUTPATIENT PROGRAMS

Ethics of Assessment. Ethics vs. Law. Ethics vs. Law 7/19/2012. Ethics: what one should or should not do, according to principles or norms of conduct

II3B GD2 Depression and Suicidality in Human Research

Occupational Therapy & Physiotherapy Assistant

Together we are better 102, ,451 Total number of appointments booked. 430 Number of volunteers. 750 Number of staff BY THE NUMBERS 2016/2017:

Highlights of the Research Consortium 2002 Non-Clinical Sample Study

Model of Human Occupation

CRITICALLY APPRAISED PAPER (CAP)

Test Reactivity: Does the Measurement of Identity Serve as an Impetus for Identity Exploration?

Dr Clare Sheahan, Dr Diana Howlett (plus wider input via CCHP Autism Core group)

Evaluating the Reliability and Validity of the. Questionnaire for Situational Information: Item Analyses. Final Report

Deakin Research Online

A new scale (SES) to measure engagement with community mental health services

Child Development Center Guide. A Guide for Families Seeking a Developmental Assessment for Children

Validity and reliability of a 36-item problemrelated distress screening tool in a community sample of 319 cancer survivors

A Study of Occupational Therapy Telehealth Coaching for Families of Children with Autism

Background. Workshop. Using the WHOQOL in NZ

STATE COLLEGE OF FLORIDA OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY ASSISTANT PROGRAM

Overview. Need for screening. Screening for Autism Spectrum Disorders and Neurodevelopmental Disorders

Occupational therapy after stroke

Discussant: Heinz-Herbert Noll GESIS, Social Indicators Research Centre, Mannheim. Session STS 045 ISI World Congress, Dublin, August 25, 2011

draft Big Five 03/13/ HFM

I tell my patients, If I can do it, you can do it. Lea Stewart

ASD Working Group Endpoints

Description of Courses. Counseling

Measures of Adult Work Disability The Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) and the Rheumatoid Arthritis Work Instability Scale (RA-WIS)

Transcription:

Outcome Measure Sensitivity to Change Population Domain Type of Measure ICF-Code/s Description Children s Assessment of Participation and Enjoyment & Activities of Children (CAPE) No Paediatric Social Role Participation and Social Competence Interview / Clinician-rated d710-d729 The Children's Assessment of Participation and Enjoyment (CAPE) and the Preferences for Activities of Children (PAC) are two companion measures of children's participation. Both are self-report measures of children's participation in recreation and leisure activities outside of mandated school activities. The CAPE is a 55-item questionnaire designed to examine how children and youth participate in everyday activities outside of their school classes. The CAPE provides information about five dimensions of participation. This includes diversity (number of activities done), intensity (frequency of participation measured as a function of the number of possible activities within a category), and enjoyment of activities. It also provides information about the context in which children and youth participate in these activities (i.e., with whom and where they participate). The PAC taps into a sixth dimension of participation, i.e., children's preferences for involvement in each activity. There is a self-administered and interviewer-assisted version of each measure. The CAPE takes approximately 30-45 minutes to complete, depending on the number of activities the child does. The PAC takes generally 15-20 minutes to complete. Both measures are appropriate for children and youth (with and without disabilities) between 6 and 21 years of age. There are three levels of scoring for the CAPE and PAC: 1) overall participation scores; 2) scores for two domains (formal and informal activities); and 3) scale scores for five types of activities (recreational, active physical, social, skill-based, self-improvement). Scores can be computed for these levels for each of the five dimensions of participation obtained from the CAPE (I.e., diversity, intensity, enjoyment,

with whom and where) and for the preference dimension from the PAC. Properties OVERVIEW AND USES Age: 6 to 21 years (with and without disabilities) Administration Setting: CAPE 30 45 minutes; PAC 15 20 minutes Administration Format: Self-administered and interviewer-assisted version of the questionnaire Scoring Option: The questionnaire takes approximately 30-45 minutes to complete, depending on the number of activities the child does. There are 3 levels of scoring for the CAPE: overall participation scores, scores for two domains (formal and informal activities), and scale scores for five types of activities (recreational, active physical, social, skill based, and selfimprovement). Scores can be calculated for these levels for each of the 5 dimensions of participation obtained from the questionnaire (diversity, intensity, enjoyment, with whom and where). Diversity: There is an overall diversity score ranging from 0-55 (due to the 55 total items), a range for the informal diversity score is 0-40 (due to the 40 informal items) and a range for the formal diversity score is 0-15 (due to 15 formal items). This subscale scale is scored individually 0 (meaning the child has not performed this activity) or 1 (meaning the child has participated in this type of activity). All the 1 scores are then added in the scoring calculations section to give you an overall range score from 0-55. Intensity: refers to how often the child participates in the activity ranging from 1 (1 time in the past four months) to 7 (1 or more times a day.) There are 7 scoring options here. Each item is scored from 1-7 and added up to get a subtotal for items 1-21. There is a second subtotal for items 22-55. The two subtotals are added together to get a total score for intensity, this is then divided by 55 (due to the total number of items being scored) to give you an overall intensity score. For example items 1-21 are scored to 37, items 22-55 are scored to 45. These two numbers summed equals 82, which is then divided by 55 (82/55) = 1.5 overall intensity score. With Whom: There are five responses options for with whom dimension on the CAPE: (1) alone, (2) with family, (3) with other relatives, (4) with friends, and (5) with others. The with whom score is calculated by adding together the with whom ratings of those items that the child does and dividing the number of items that the child does. The possible range of scores for this dimension is 1.0-5.0. There is a subtotal score items 1-21 and a subtotal score for items 22-55. For example subtotal score for items 1-21 is 25 and subtotal score for items 22-55 is 17. These two numbers

summed is 42 and this is divided by the total number of items that child participates in (17), therefore 42/17 = 2.5 overall with whom score. Where: There are six responses for this category, therefore each item is scored from 1-6. The scoring options for the where dimension on the CAPE: (1) at home, (2) at a relative s home, (3) in your neighbourhood, (4) at school, (5) in your community, and (6) beyond your community. This score is calculated by adding together the where ratings of those items that the child participates in and dividing by the total number of items. The possible range of scores for this dimension are 1.0-6.0. For example, 14 (subtotal for items 1-21) + 24 (subtotal for items 22-55) = 38/17 (total number of items) = 2.2 overall where score. Enjoyment: There are five responses for this category, therefore each item is scored from 1-5. The scoring options for the enjoyment dimension of the CAPE: (1) not at all, (2) somewhat; sort of, (3) pretty much, (4) very much, and (5) love it. The enjoyment score is calculated by adding the enjoyment ratings of those items the child participates in and dividing it by the total number of items that the child completes. The overall score range for this dimension is from 1.0-5.0. Example, 37 (subtotal for items 1-21) + 27 (subtotal for items 22-55) = 64/17 (total number of activities) = 3.8 overall enjoyment score. The same 55 activities are then used in the PAC. The PAC breaks the items into five categories including: recreational activities, physical activities, social activities, skill-based activities, and self-improvement activities. Every PAC item IS scored based on preference. Preference: The three responses include: (1) I would not like to do it all, (2) I would sort of like to do it, and (3) I would really like to do it. The preference score is calculated by summing the preference ratings and dividing by the total number of items. The divisor number depends on the number of items under each category (for example the recreational activity category has 12 items, so total score /12 = the preference score for rec. activities.). The overall preference score ranges from 1.0-3.0. So each category is scored like the example above and the scores for all the five categories are added up to a total that is divided by the total number of items on the PAC (55). This gives the administerer an overall PAC score. USES: Administer the CAPE to explore an individual s day-to-day participation for the purpose of intervention planning or measuring outcomes. The PAC may be used to assess an individual s preference for activities. Both measures are appropriate for clients with or without disabilities between the ages of 6 and 21 years.

CAPE and PAC may be used independently or together Both tools can be used by either having the client complete the record form with assistance from the parent or caregiver, or by using the activity and category cards Activity types address recreational, physical, social, skill-based, and self-improvement Ideal for use as a pre and post indicator of the effectiveness of intervention in improving participation Allows the child to be an active participant in goal setting and intervention Environment for Testing: In a setting that allows focus on individual patient with adequate lighting to ensure proper observation Equipment and Materials Needed: Researcher needs to buy the CAPE Kit before administering. Examiner Qualifications: Any clinician with expertise to observe/score include, but is not limited to a paediatrician, paediatric neurologist, paediatric nurse, paediatric developmental psychologist, paediatric physiatrist, paediatric intensivist, and/or paediatric respiratory therapist may be suitable for observation. PSYCHOMETRIC CHARACTERISTICS Reliability: This assessment uses internal consistency and test-retest reliability. The internal consistency is calculated using a Cronbach s Alpha which compares each item to the overall score and the other individual items. This assessment was completed on both the PAC and CAPE. The PAC scored better for the formal and informal domains. The overall PAC scores were.76 (formal) and.84(informal). The overall CAPE scores were.42 (formal) and.76 (informal). The test-retest scores were administered to three CAPE subscales including the diversity, intensity and enjoyment subscales. These scores were scored for overall participation in the three categories and then compared to the PAC scores for each of the five categories. The scores for diversity, intensity, and enjoyment ranged from.64-.86 indicating sufficient test-retest reliability. Validity: The validity is related to test content and is based on the degree to which the items represent and relate to the construct being measured. For the CAPE, the correlations among activity types are low, ranging from.22 to.44. This means that the CAPE does not have strong validity. Correlations that have been reported as evidence of construct validity

were smaller in magnitude than expected (most falling in the 0.10 to 0.20 range); however, 70% of the significant correlations were predicted. For the PAC preference scores the range was low from.27-.55, with the highest found between skill-based activities and self-improvement activities at.55. This makes sense as self-development activities usually entail skill development. The CAPE / PAC are not looking to rule in or out conditions / diagnoses, therefore sensitivity and specificity are not available. Advantages 1) The CAPE directly measures participation and does not confound participation with competence or amount of assistance; 2) Wide age range (6-21 years); 3) Used in clinically for diagnostic purposes; 4) This measure can be used to examine the influence of skill, support, and opportunity-based interventions on children s participation, as well as the influence of impairments and environmental factors. 5) The CAPE and PAC are designed to be user friendly for children and their parents or caregivers. 6) The CAPE / PAC provide a way to measure several dimensions of participation from a client-centered perspective. 7) This assessment can be used on both children with and without disabilities. This allows the CAPE / PAC to be an engaging tool to use with all types of clients. 8) This tool can be used any OT practice setting designed to provide interventions for children. Disadvantages 1) Needs to be filled by a clinician who knows the child; 2) Long: takes 15-20 minutes to complete; 3) Costly; 4) Administration depends on the child s ability to fill out a questionnaire. 5) The scoring is slightly limited for some categories and the categories could be more detailed to provide clearer evidence if the child really likes participating in activities or not. Additional Information No additional training is required. The administerer should have high skill levels for interviewing children and the ability to establish a rapport with children and parents or caregivers. The administerer should have extensive

knowledge of the manual and score sheet to administer the CAPE and PAC. Reviewers Vicki Anderson Cathy Catroppa References Imms, C. (2008). Review of the Children's Assessment of Participation and Enjoyment and the Preferences for Activity of Children. Physical & occupational therapy in paediatrics, 28(4), 389-404. King, G. A. (2004). CAPE/PAC Manual: Children's Assessment of Participation and Enjoyment & Preferences for Activities of Children. PsychCorp. King, G. A., Law, M., King, S., Hurley, P., Hanna, S., Kertoy, M., & Rosenbaum, P. (2006). Measuring children s participation in recreation and leisure activities: construct validation of the CAPE and PAC. Child: care, health and development, 33(1), 28-39. King G, A., Law M, et al. Children s Assessment of Participation and Enjoyment (CAPE) and Preferences for Activities of Children (PAC). Harcourt Assessment, Inc., San Antonio, TX, USA. 2004. King G, A., Law M, et. al. Measuring children s participation in recreation and leisure activities: construct validation of the CAPE and PAC. Child: care, health and development: 33 (1) 28-39.