Searching for just a few words should be enough to get started. If you need to make more complex queries, use the tips below to guide you.
Subtitle:
Article type: Research Article
Authors: Gouttebarge, Vincent | Plat, Marie-Christine J. | Kuijer, P. Paul F.M. | Sluiter, Judith K.* | Frings-Dresen, Monique H.W.
Affiliations: Coronel Institute of Occupational Health, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Correspondence: [*] Corresponding author: Judith K. Sluiter, Academic Medical Center, Department Coronel Institute of Occupational Health, PO Box 22700, 1100 DE Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Tel.: +31 20 566 2735; Fax: +31 20 697 7161; E-mail:j.sluiter@amc.nl
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the reproducibility (i.e., agreement and inter-rater reliability) of two task-specific functional capacity evaluation protocols meant to simulate the daily workload of collectors using either two-wheeled waste containers or bags. METHODS: A within-subjects design was used to assess reproducibility in terms of agreement and reliability. Twenty-one household waste collectors were assessed twice with both task-specific protocols with a time interval of seven days. Agreement was assessed using the Standard Error of Measurement (SEM), and inter-rater reliability was assessed using the Intra-Class Correlation Coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: For the task-specific protocol for waste collection using two-wheeled containers, agreement was excellent (SEM = 0.9 points; 0-340 scale; mean score 339), but inter-rater reliability was poor (ICC = 0.22). For the task-specific protocol for bag collection, agreement was acceptable (SEM = 53 s; continuous scale; mean time 779 s), and inter-rater reliability was good (ICC = 0.79). CONCLUSIONS: Reproducibility of the task-specific protocol for bag collection is acceptable to good, while the task-specific protocol for waste collection using two-wheeled containers has an excellent agreement but a poor reliability. Although face and content validity have been covered within the development of both protocols, further studies should evaluate the construct and criterion-related validity of both task-specific protocols.
Keywords: Functional capacity evaluation, work ability, waste collection, reproducibility
DOI: 10.3233/WOR-141851
Journal: Work, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 307-314, 2015
IOS Press, Inc.
6751 Tepper Drive
Clifton, VA 20124
USA
Tel: +1 703 830 6300
Fax: +1 703 830 2300
sales@iospress.com
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to editorial@iospress.nl
IOS Press
Nieuwe Hemweg 6B
1013 BG Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 20 688 3355
Fax: +31 20 687 0091
info@iospress.nl
For editorial issues, permissions, book requests, submissions and proceedings, contact the Amsterdam office info@iospress.nl
Inspirees International (China Office)
Ciyunsi Beili 207(CapitaLand), Bld 1, 7-901
100025, Beijing
China
Free service line: 400 661 8717
Fax: +86 10 8446 7947
china@iospress.cn
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to editorial@iospress.nl
如果您在出版方面需要帮助或有任何建, 件至: editorial@iospress.nl