<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Matsuda, Patricia Noritake</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Verrall, Aimee M</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Finlayson, Marcia L</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Molton, Ivan R</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jensen, Mark P</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Falls Among Adults Aging With Disability.</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Arch Phys Med Rehabil</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2015</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2014 Oct 19</style></date></pub-dates></dates><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prevalence of and risk factors for falling among individuals aging with multiple sclerosis (MS), muscular dystrophy (MD), postpolio syndrome (PPS), and spinal cord injury (SCI). DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey data from 2009 to 2010 were analyzed. We used forward logistic regression models to examine whether risk factors such as age, sex, mobility level, years since diagnosis, vision, balance, weakness, number of comorbid conditions, and physical activity could distinguish participants who reported falling from those who did not. SETTING: Surveys were mailed to community-dwelling individuals who had 1 of 4 diagnoses (MS, MD, PPS, or SCI). The survey response rate was 91%. PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample of community-dwelling individuals (N=1862; age, 18-94y) with MS, MD, PPS, or SCI in the United States. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Self-reported fall within the last 6 months. RESULTS: Fall prevalence for people with MS (54%), MD (70%), PPS (55%), and SCI (40%). Across all 4 groups, fall rates peaked in middle age (45-64y) and among people with moderate mobility limitations. Seven risk factors differentiated participants who fell from those who did not: mobility level, imbalance, age, curvilinear age (age(2)), number of comorbid conditions, duration of diagnosis, and sex. The models differed across diagnostic groups. CONCLUSIONS: People aging with long-term physical disabilities experience unique challenges that affect their risk of falls. A better understanding of the frequency, severity, and risk factors of falls across diagnostic groups is needed to design and implement customized, effective fall prevention and management programs for these individuals.&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Fogelberg, Donald J</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Vitiello, Michael V</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hoffman, Jeanne M</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bamer, Alyssa M</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Amtmann, Dagmar</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Comparison of Self-Report Sleep Measures for Individuals With Multiple Sclerosis and Spinal Cord Injury.</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Arch Phys Med Rehabil</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2014</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2014 Oct 23</style></date></pub-dates></dates><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;OBJECTIVE: To investigate self-report measures of sleep disturbances and sleep-related impairments in samples of individuals with multiple sclerosis (MS) or spinal cord injury (SCI). DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Community based. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (age &amp;ge;18y) (N=700) with either MS (n=461) or SCI (n=239) who were enrolled in a longitudinal survey of self-reported health outcomes and who completed self-report sleep measures at 1 time point. INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale (MOS-S), Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) sleep disturbance short form, and PROMIS sleep-related impairments short form. RESULTS: Mean scores on the MOS-S sleep index II were significantly worse for both the MS and SCI samples than those of previously reported samples representative of the U.S. general population (P&amp;lt;.0001 for each group). The PROMIS sleep disturbance short form and PROMIS sleep-related impairments short form scores of the MS sample were also significantly different from those reported for the calibration cohort (P&amp;lt;.0001 on each scale). However, although the scores of the SCI sample were significantly different from those of the comparison cohort for the PROMIS sleep-related impairments short form (P=.045), the differences on the PROMIS sleep disturbance short form were not significant (P=.069). CONCLUSIONS: Although the MOS-S scores for the MS and SCI cohorts clearly indicated significantly high levels of sleep-related problems and were consistent with existing literature, the more ambiguous findings from the PROMIS sleep disturbance short form and PROMIS sleep-related impairments short form suggest that not enough is currently known about how these instruments function when applied to those with chronic neurologic dysfunction.&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Friedly, Janna</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Akuthota, Venu</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Amtmann, Dagmar</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Patrick, Donald</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Why disability and rehabilitation specialists should lead the way in patient-reported outcomes.</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Arch Phys Med Rehabil</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Humans</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Leadership</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Patient Outcome Assessment</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Patient-Centered Care</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Self Report</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2014</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2014 Aug</style></date></pub-dates></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">95</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1419-22</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">8</style></issue></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Victorson, David</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Manly, Jennifer</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Wallner-Allen, Kathleen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Fox, Nathan</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Purnell, Christy</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hendrie, Hugh</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Havlik, Richard</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Harniss, Mark</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Magasi, Susan</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Correia, Helena</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Gershon, Richard</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Using the NIH Toolbox in special populations: considerations for assessment of pediatric, geriatric, culturally diverse, non-English-speaking, and disabled individuals.</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Neurology</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Cultural Diversity</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Culture</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Disabled Persons</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Geriatrics</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Humans</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Language</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">National Institutes of Health (U.S.)</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Pediatrics</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">United States</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2013</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2013 Mar 12</style></date></pub-dates></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">80</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">S13-9</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;BACKGROUND: In order to develop health outcomes measures that are relevant and applicable to the general population, it is essential to consider the needs and requirements of special subgroups, such as the young, elderly, disabled, and people of different ethnic and cultural backgrounds, within that population. METHODS: The NIH Toolbox project convened several working groups to address assessment issues for the following subgroups: pediatric, geriatric, cultural, non-English-speaking, and disabled. Each group reviewed all NIH Toolbox instruments in their entirety. RESULTS: Each working group provided recommendations to the scientific study teams regarding instrument content, presentation, and administration. When feasible and appropriate, instruments and administration procedures have been modified in accordance with these recommendations. CONCLUSION: Health outcome measurement can benefit from expert input regarding assessment considerations for special subgroups.&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">11 Suppl 3</style></issue></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>10</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Finlayson, Marcia</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Verrall, Aimee</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Matsuda, Patricia Noritake</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Molton, Ivan R</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jensen, Mark P</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Prevalence of Falling and Injuries in Older Adults with a Physical Disability</style></title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2012</style></year></dates><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">American Public Health Association (APHA) Annual Meeting</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">San Francisco, CA</style></pub-location><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Introduction. Falling among older adults is a wide-spread problem that often has devastating consequences for the individual and family. However, knowledge about the scope and correlates of falls among people aging with multiple sclerosis (MS), muscular dystrophy (MD), post-polio (PPS) and spinal cord injury (SCI) is very limited. Research in this area is particularly important because these individuals often experience problems with mobility, balance, sensation, and muscle power that place them at significant risk for both falls and injurious falls. Methods. Cross-sectional data were used from a survey of individuals aging (45 yrs +) with MS, MD, PPS, and SCI (n = 1,862). The survey contained 6 questions about falling. Logistical regression models were built to examine whether factors such as age, sex, and mobility were associated with falling. Results. The prevalence of falls reported in the last 6 months was 73% MD, 56% MS, 55%, PPS, 42% SCI. The rate of injurious falls was 23% MD, 19% MD, 22% PPS, 20% SCI. The major factor associated with falling in older adults across all 4 disabilities was limitations in mobility . Sex was only significant in people with MS, with women being less likely to fall than men. Younger and middle age categories tended to have an increased odds of falling. Conclusion. Preventing falls in persons with disabilities is of paramount importance. A better understanding of the frequency, severity, and correlates of falls is an important first step towards designing effective fall prevention and management programs for these individuals.&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>10</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Matsuda, Patricia Noritake</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Verrall, Aimee</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Finlayson, Marcia</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Molton, Ivan R</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jensen, Mark P</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Prevalence of Falling and Injuries in People Aging with Multiple Sclerosis, Muscular Dystrophy, Post-Polio Syndrome, and Spinal Cord Injury</style></title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2012</style></year></dates><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">International Symposium on Gait and Balance in Multiple Sclerosis</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Portland, OR</style></pub-location><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;u&gt;Background.&lt;/u&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;nbsp; Falls among older adults often have devastating consequences.&amp;nbsp; However, knowledge about the scope and correlates of falls among people aging with multiple sclerosis (MS), muscular dystrophy (MD), post-polio (PPS), and spinal cord injury (SCI) is limited.&amp;nbsp; Research in this area is particularly important because these individuals often experience problems with mobility, balance, sensation, and strength that place them at significant risk for both falls and injurious falls.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;u&gt;Methods&lt;/u&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;u&gt;.&lt;/u&gt; Cross-sectional data were used from a survey of individuals aging (45 yrs +) with MS, MD, PPS, and SCI (n = 1,862). The survey contained 6 questions about falling. Logistic regression models were built to examine whether age, sex, and mobility were associated with falling.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;u&gt;Results&lt;/u&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;strong&gt;.&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;nbsp; The prevalence of falls reported in the last 6 months was 73% for people with MD, 56% for MS, 55% PPS, and 42% for SCI. The rates of injurious falls were:&amp;nbsp; 23% in MD, 22% in PPS, 20% in SCI, and 19% in MS. The major factor associated with falling in all group was limitations in mobility (e.g., reporting use of an assistive device for mobility or limited self-mobility with use of physical assistance or device). Sex was only significant in people with MS, with women being less likely to fall than men.&amp;nbsp; Across all 4 groups the prevalence of falls was highest among the middle age groups (e.g.44-64).relative to the older groups (65+).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;u&gt;Conclusion/Clinical Relevance&lt;/u&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;strong&gt;:&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;nbsp; Falls are a common experience among people aging with MS, MD, PPS, or SCI.&amp;nbsp; Falls were experienced by all age groups studied, but greatest in those who are middle-aged (45-64).&amp;nbsp; This suggests that fall prevention strategies should not be limited to older individuals. &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;Preventing falls is of paramount importance.&amp;nbsp; A better understanding of the frequency, severity, and correlates of falls will assist health care providers to develop effective fall prevention and management programs for these individuals.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jensen, Mark P</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Molton, Ivan R</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Groah, Suzanne L</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Campbell, Margaret L</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Charlifue, Susan</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Chiodo, A</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Forchheimer, Martin</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Krause, James S</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tate, Denise</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Secondary health conditions in individuals aging with SCI: terminology, concepts and analytic approaches.</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Spinal Cord</style></secondary-title><alt-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Spinal Cord</style></alt-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2012</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2012 May</style></date></pub-dates></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">50</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">373-8</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;STUDY DESIGN: Literature review. OBJECTIVES: Utilizing individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) as a representative population for physical disability, this paper: (1) reviews the history of the concept of secondary conditions as it applies to the health of individuals aging with long-term disabilities; (2) proposes a definition of secondary health conditions (SHCs) and a conceptual model for understanding the factors that are related to SHCs as individuals age with a disability; and (3) discusses the implications of the model for the assessment of SHCs and for developing interventions that minimize their frequency, severity and negative effects on the quality of life of individuals aging with SCI and other disabilities. METHODS: Key findings from research articles, reviews and book chapters addressing the concept of SHCs in individuals with SCI and other disabilities were summarized to inform the development of a conceptual approach for measuring SCI-related SHCs. CONCLUSIONS: Terms used to describe health conditions secondary to SCI and other physical disabilities are used inconsistently throughout the literature. This inconsistency represents a barrier to improvement, measurement and for the development of effective interventions to reduce or prevent these health conditions and mitigate their effects on participation and quality of life. A working definition of the term SHCs is proposed for use in research with individuals aging with SCI, with the goal of facilitating stronger evidence and increased knowledge upon which policy and practice can improve the health and well-being of individuals aging with a disability.&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">5</style></issue><custom1><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22143678?dopt=Abstract</style></custom1></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Groah, Suzanne L</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Charlifue, Susan</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tate, Denise</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jensen, Mark P</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Molton, Ivan R</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Forchheimer, Martin</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Krause, James S</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Lammertse, Daniel P</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Campbell, Margaret L</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Spinal cord injury and aging: challenges and recommendations for future research.</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">American Journal of Physical Medicine &amp; Rehabilitation</style></secondary-title><alt-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Am J Phys Med Rehabil</style></alt-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Adult</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Aged</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Aging</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Biomedical Research</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Continuity of Patient Care</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Disabled Persons</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Female</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Forecasting</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Humans</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Injury Severity Score</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Long-Term Care</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Male</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Middle Aged</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Needs Assessment</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Paraplegia</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Practice Guidelines as Topic</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Quadriplegia</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Spinal Cord Injuries</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">United States</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Young Adult</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2012</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2012 Jan</style></date></pub-dates></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">91</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">80-93</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Population aging, caused by reductions in fertility and increasing longevity, varies by country and is anticipated to continue and to reach global proportions during the 21st century. Although the effects of population aging have been well documented for decades, the impact of aging on people with spinal cord injury (SCI) has not received similar attention. It is reasonable to expect that population aging features such as the increasing mean age of the population, share of the population in the oldest age groups, and life expectancy would be reflected in SCI population demographics. Although the mean age and share of the SCI population older than 65 yrs are increasing, data from the National Spinal Cord Injury Statistical Center suggest that life expectancy increases in the SCI population have not kept the same pace as those without SCI in the last 15 yrs. The reasons for this disparity are likely multifactorial and include the changing demographics of the SCI population with more older people being injured; susceptibility of people with SCI to numerous medical conditions that impart a health hazard; risky behaviors leading to a disproportionate percentage of deaths as a result of preventable causes, including septicemia; changes in the delivery of health services during the first year after injury when the greatest resources are available; and other unknown factors. The purposes of this paper are (1) to define and differentiate general population aging and aging in people with SCI, (2) to briefly present the state of the science on health conditions in those aging with SCI, and finally, (3) to present recommendations for future research in the area of aging with SCI.&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1</style></issue><custom1><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21681060?dopt=Abstract</style></custom1></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Cook, Karon F</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bombardier, Charles H</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bamer, Alyssa M</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Choi, Seung W</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kroenke, Kurt</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Fann, Jesse R</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Do somatic and cognitive symptoms of traumatic brain injury confound depression screening?</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Arch Phys Med Rehabil</style></secondary-title><alt-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Arch Phys Med Rehabil</style></alt-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Adult</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Brain Injuries</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Cognition Disorders</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Depression</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Depressive Disorder, Major</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Female</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Humans</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Male</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Middle Aged</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Primary Health Care</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Retrospective Studies</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2011</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2011 May</style></date></pub-dates></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">92</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">818-23</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether items of the Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9) function differently in persons with traumatic brain injury (TBI) than in persons from a primary care sample. DESIGN: This study was a retrospective analysis of responses to the PHQ-9 collected in 2 previous studies. Responses to the PHQ-9 were modeled using item response theory, and the presence of DIF was evaluated using ordinal logistic regression. SETTING: Eight primary care sites and a single trauma center in Washington state. PARTICIPANTS: Participants (N=3365) were persons from 8 primary care sites (n=3000) and a consecutive sample of persons with complicated mild to severe TBI from a trauma center who were 1 year postinjury (n=365). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: PHQ-9. RESULTS: No PHQ-9 item demonstrated statistically significant or meaningful DIF attributable to TBI. A sensitivity analysis failed to show that the cumulative effects of nonsignificant DIF resulted in a systematic inflation of PHQ-9 total scores. Therefore, the results also do not support the hypothesis that cumulative DIF for PHQ-9 items spuriously inflates the numbers of persons with TBI screened as potentially having major depressive disorder. CONCLUSIONS: The PHQ-9 is a valid screener of major depressive disorder in people with complicated mild to severe TBI, and all symptoms can be counted toward the diagnosis of major depressive disorder without special concern about overdiagnosis or unnecessary treatment.&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">5</style></issue><custom1><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21530731?dopt=Abstract</style></custom1></record></records></xml>