Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33800131›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Perspectives of Multidisciplinary Professional Teams during Assessment Processes for ATD Selection in the Japanese Public Provision System.

Jun Suzurikawa, Yuki Sawada, Miwa Sakiyama, Motoi Suwa, Takenobu Inoue, Tomoko Kondo

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jun SuzurikawaDepartment of Assistive Technology, Research Institute, National Rehabilitation Center for Persons with Disabilities, 4-1 Namiki, Tokorozawa-shi, Saitama 359-8555, Japan.
Yuki SawadaDepartment of Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Teikyo University of Science, 2525 Yatsusawa, Uenohara-shi, Yananashi 409-0193, Japan.
Miwa SakiyamaDepartment of Assistive Technology, Research Institute, National Rehabilitation Center for Persons with Disabilities, 4-1 Namiki, Tokorozawa-shi, Saitama 359-8555, Japan.
Motoi SuwaResearch Institute, National Rehabilitation Center for Persons with Disabilities, 4-1 Namiki, Tokorozawa-shi, Saitama 359-8555, Japan.
Takenobu InoueDepartment of Assistive Technology, Research Institute, National Rehabilitation Center for Persons with Disabilities, 4-1 Namiki, Tokorozawa-shi, Saitama 359-8555, Japan.
Tomoko KondoDepartment of Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, Kyorin University, 5-4-1 Shimorenjaku, Mitaka-shi, Tokyo 181-8612, Japan.
National Rehabilitation Center for Persons with Disabilities · JPKyorin University · JPTeikyo University of Science · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Selection of assistive technology devices (ATDs), which are imperative for persons with disabilities to improve their quality of life, requires collaboration of users and multidisciplinary professionals. However, it is still unknown how to design and implement an adequate collaborative work flow and a professional team. Under Japanese governmental ATD provision system, based on the application by clients, ATDs are mainly selected through collaborative processes with the clients and health professionals in public organizations, rehabilitation counseling centers (RCCs). By employing qualitative study methods in this study, we investigated the ATD selection process in which health professionals in RCCs collaboratively assess clients with physical disabilities so as to support them in selecting the adequate ATDs. To identify the perspectives required for ATD selection completely, the assessment processes were recorded and analyzed with a pseudo setting in two RCCs. Content analysis of the conversations between the client and professionals revealed the characteristics of the information exchanged in the assessment processes. A total of 760 assessment items were identified, thus indicating a broad array of interest. Despite the richness of information collected for the assessment, half of the assessment items did not have corresponding items in the documents that were employed during the prescription process. Thematic analysis of the interviews that followed revealed the common values and collaborative processes in ATD selection, which were shared and elaborated among the staff in daily social interactions. To facilitate implementation of ATD provision in various areas with few resources, it may be effective to convert this tacit-to-tacit knowledge sharing into a more explicit sharing by promoting analyses of good practices.

Indexed as

Persons with DisabilitiesSelf-Help DevicesCounselingHumansJapanQuality of Lifeassistive technologymultidisciplinary collaborationrehabilitation servicessocial servicestacit knowledge

Identifiers

PMID33800131
PMCPMC7967433
OpenAlexW3135229740

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.