AI Article Synopsis

  • The study assessed the construct validity of the Enfranchisement scale, which measures community participation, using data from a sample of 604 adults with disabilities.
  • The main findings indicated that participants scored low on enfranchisement, highlighting challenges in community involvement, with strong links to social participation and mental health issues like depression.
  • The results confirmed that the Enfranchisement scale correlates well with participation measures but distinguishes itself from disability-related impairments, suggesting it effectively captures aspects of community engagement.

Article Abstract

Objective: This study examined the construct validity of the Enfranchisement scale of the Community Participation Indicators.

Design: We conducted a secondary analysis of data collected in a cross-sectional study of rehabilitation outcomes.

Subjects: The parent study included 604 community-dwelling adults with chronic traumatic brain injury, stroke, or spinal cord injury. The sample had a mean age of 64.1 years, was two-thirds male, and included a high proportion of racial minorities ( = 250, 41.4%).

Main Measures: The Enfranchisement scale contains two subscales: the Control subscale and the Importance subscale. We examined correlations between each Enfranchisement subscale and measures of participation, environment, and impairments. The current analyses included cases with at least 80% of items completed on each subscale (Control subscale: = 391; Importance subscale: = 219). Missing values were imputed using multiple imputation.

Results: The sample demonstrated high scores, indicating poor enfranchisement (Control subscale: = 51.7; Importance subscale: = 43.0). Both subscales were most strongly associated with measures of participation (Control subscale: = 0.56; Importance subscale: = 0.52), and least strongly associated with measures of cognition (Control subscale: = 0.03; Importance subscale: = 0.03). The Importance subscale was closely associated with depression ( = 0.54), and systems, services, and policies ( = 0.50). Both subscales were associated with social attitudes (Control subscale: = 0.44; Importance subscale: = 0.44) and social support (Control subscale: = 0.49; Importance subscale: = 0.41).

Conclusions: We found evidence of convergent validity between the Enfranchisement scale and measures of participation, and discriminant validity between the Enfranchisement scale and measures of disability-related impairments. The analyses also revealed the importance of the environment to enfranchisement outcomes.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/02692155211040930DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

control subscale
28
enfranchisement scale
20
subscale
17
validity enfranchisement
16
measures participation
12
construct validity
8
enfranchisement
8
scale community
8
community participation
8
subscales associated
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!