International survey on the implementation of the European and American guidelines on disorders of consciousness.

Diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic procedures for patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness (pDoCs) vary significantly across countries and clinical settings, likely due to organizational factors (e.g., research vs. non-academic hospitals), expertise and availability of resources (e.g., financial and human). Two international guidelines, one from the European Academy of Neurology (EAN) and one from the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) in collaboration with the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine (ACRM) and the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research (NIDILRR), were developed to facilitate consistent practice among professionals working with this challenging patient population. While the recommendations of both guidelines agree in principle, it remains an open issue how to implement them into clinical practice in the care pathway for patients with pDoCs. We conducted an online survey to explore health professional clinical practices related to the management of patients with pDoCs, and compare said practices with selected recommendations from both the guidelines. The survey revealed that while some recommendations are being followed, others are not and/or may require more honing/specificity to enhance their clinical utility. Particular attention should be given to the implementation of a multimodal assessment of residual consciousness, to the detection and treatment of pain, and to the impact of restrictions imposed by COVID-19 pandemics on the involvement of patients' families/representatives.

Validation of PROMIS-29 domain scores among adult burn survivors: A National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research Burn Model System Study.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes are important for understanding recovery after burn injury, benchmarking service delivery and measuring the impact of interventions. Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-29 domains have been validated for use among diverse populations though not among burn survivors. The purpose of this study was to examine validity and reliability of PROMIS-29 scores in this population. METHODS: The PROMIS-29 scores of physical function, anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep disturbance, ability to participate in social roles, and pain interference were evaluated for validity and reliability in adult burn survivors. Unidimensionality, floor and ceiling effects, internal consistency, and reliability were examined. Differential item functioning was used to examine bias with respect to demographic and injury characteristics. Correlations with measures of related constructs (Community Integration Questionnaire, Satisfaction with Life Scale, Post-Traumatic Stress Checklist-Civilian, and Veteran's Rand-12) and known-group differences were examined. RESULTS: Eight hundred and seventy-six burn survivors with moderate to severe injury from 6 months to 20 years postburn provided responses on PROMIS-29 domains. Participants' ages ranged from 18 years to 93 years at time of assessment; mean years since injury was 3.4. All PROMIS domain scores showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.87-0.97). There was a large ceiling effect on ability to participate in social roles (39.7%) and physical function (43.3%). One-factor confirmatory factor analyses supported unidimensionality (all comparative fit indices >0.95). We found no statistically significant bias (differential item functioning). Reliability was high (>0.9) across trait levels for all domains except sleep, which reached moderate reliability (>0.85). All known-group differences by demographic and clinical characteristics were in the hypothesized direction and magnitude except burn size categories. CONCLUSION: The results provide strong evidence for reliability and validity of PROMIS-29 domain scores among adult burn survivors. Reliability of the extreme scores could be increased and the ceiling effects reduced by administering PROMIS-43, which includes six items per domain, or by administering by computerized adaptive testing. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Test or Criteria, level III.

"Rehabilitation Research Framework for Patients With COVID-19" Defined by Cochrane Rehabilitation and the World Health Organization Rehabilitation Programme.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in a surge of research activity. Since its outset, efforts have been made to guide the rapid generation of research in medicine. There are gaps in some areas of rehabilitation research for patients with COVID-19. The development of a specific research framework might serve to help monitor the status of research (mapping), shape and strengthen research by pointing to under-investigated areas, and promote rehabilitation research in this context. This article introduces and discusses the COVID-19 Rehabilitation Research Framework (CRRF) and presents the methodology used for its development. The questions have been developed among the World Health Organization (WHO) Rehabilitation Programme, Cochrane Rehabilitation, and the experts of its Rehabilitation-COVID-19 Evidence-based Response Action International Multiprofessional Steering Committee. The framework is divided into 2 parts and includes 20 questions organized in 4 groups: epidemiology, and evidence at the micro- (individual), meso- (health services), and macro- (health systems) levels. The CRRF offers a comprehensive view of the research areas relevant to COVID-19 and rehabilitation that are necessary to inform best practice and ensure rehabilitation services and health systems can best serve the population with COVID-19. The collaboration between Cochrane Rehabilitation and the WHO Rehabilitation Programme in establishing the CRRF brought together perspectives from the health systems, health management, and clinical evidence. The authors encourage researchers to use the CRRF when planning studies on rehabilitation in the context of COVID-19.

INTERnational Project for the Evaluation of "activE Rehabilitation" (inter-PEER) - a protocol for a prospective cohort study of community peer-based training programmes for people with spinal cord injury.

BACKGROUND: Active Rehabilitation (AR) is a community peer-based concept for people with spinal cord injury (SCI) that is primarily delivered through brief residential training programmes. Despite a plethora of positive anecdotal evidence of AR programmes as life-changing experiences, the effects of AR-programmes have not been evaluated scientifically. Here, we present the protocol of the INTERnational Project for the Evaluation of "activE Rehabilitation" (inter-PEER) aiming to evaluate the effects of AR training programmes on community-dwelling individuals with SCI. METHODS: International prospective cohort study that recruits consecutive participants in AR training programmes. Evaluation is conducted through a web-based survey at 3 time-points: at the commencement and completion of the training programme, and 3 months after the end of the training programme. Evaluation also includes a practical wheelchair skills test at the first two time-points. The primary outcome measures are the Spinal Cord Independence Measure Self-report (SCIM-SR), the Queensland Evaluation of Wheelchair Skills test (QEWS), the Wheelchair Skills Test Questionnaire (WST-Q) and the Moorong Self-Efficacy Scale (MSES). The secondary outcome measures are the 11-item Life Satisfaction Questionnaire (LiSat-11), the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation-Participation (USER-Participation), the Leisure Time Physical Activity Questionnaire for people with SCI (LTPAQ-SCI) and the 10-item Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC-10). We piloted the implementation of the protocol in Sweden in 7 participants with diverse SCI and sociodemographic characteristics and collected feedback from participants and peer-mentors about study procedures through interviews, a workshop and field observations. DISCUSSION: Inter-PEER is the first initiative to propose a systematic evaluation of the effects of AR training programmes among individuals with SCI. The project is a collaborative work of multiple stakeholders, including researchers, clinicians, peer mentors with SCI, and administrators of organisations providing AR programmes. The inter-PEER uses standardised outcome measures relevant to the AR context, it will facilitate quality evaluations of community peer-based programmes, stimulate international collaborations, and inform the design of randomised controlled trials on the effects of AR training programmes.

Intervention development and treatment success in UK health technology assessment funded trials of physical rehabilitation: a mixed methods analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Physical rehabilitation is a complex process, and trials of rehabilitation interventions are increasing in number but often report null results. This study aimed to establish treatment success rates in physical rehabilitation trials funded by the National Institute of Health Research Health Technology Assessment (NIHR HTA) programme and examine any relationship between treatment success and the quality of intervention development work undertaken. DESIGN: This is a mixed methods study. SETTING: This study was conducted in the UK. METHODS: The NIHR HTA portfolio was searched for all completed definitive randomised controlled trials of physical rehabilitation interventions from inception to July 2016. Treatment success was categorised according to criteria developed by Djulbegovic and colleagues. Detailed textual data regarding any intervention development work were extracted from trial reports and supporting publications and informed the development of quality ratings. Mixed methods integrative analysis was undertaken to explore the relationship between quantitative and qualitative data using joint displays. RESULTS: Fifteen trials were included in the review. Five reported a definitive finding, four of which were in favour of the 'new' intervention. Eight trials reported a true negative (no difference) outcome. Integrative analysis indicated those with lower quality intervention development work were less likely to report treatment success. CONCLUSIONS: Despite much effort and funding, most physical rehabilitation trials report equivocal findings. Greater focus on high quality intervention development may reduce the likelihood of a null result in the definitive trial, alongside high quality trial methods and conduct.

Beyond current research practice: Methodological considerations in MS rehabilitation research (is designing the perfect rehabilitation trial the Holy Grail or a Gordian knot?).

Rehabilitation is an essential aspect of symptomatic and supportive treatment for people with multiple sclerosis (MS). The number of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for rehabilitation interventions in MS has increased over the last two decades. The design, conduct and reporting quality of some of these trials could be improved. There are, however, some specific challenges that researchers face in conducting RCTs of rehabilitation interventions, which are often 'complex interventions'. This paper explores some of the challenges of undertaking robust clinical trials in rehabilitation. We focus on issues related to (1) participant selection and sample size, (2) interventions - the 'dose', content, active ingredients, targeting, fidelity of delivery and treatment adherence, (3) control groups and (4) outcomes - choosing the right type, number, timing of outcomes, and the importance of defining a primary outcome and clinically important difference between groups. We believe that by following internationally accepted RCT guidelines, by developing a critical mass of MS rehabilitation 'trialists' through international collaboration and by continuing to critique, challenge, and develop RCT designs, we can exploit the potential of RCTs to answer important questions related to the effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions.

Psychometric Properties of the Satisfaction With Life Scale in People With Traumatic Brain, Spinal Cord, or Burn Injury: A National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research Model System Study.

This study evaluated the measurement properties of the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS) in a sample of 17,897 people with spinal cord injury (48%, n = 8,566), traumatic brain injury (44%, n = 7,941), and burn injury (8%, n = 1,390), 1 year following injury. We examined measurement invariance across the groups, unidimensionality, local independence, reliability from a classical test and item response theory (IRT) framework, and fit to a unidimensional IRT model. The results support unidimensionality and local independence of the SWLS. Reliability was adequate from a classical test and IRT perspective. IRT analysis found that the SWLS could be improved by using only five response categories rather than seven and by removing the fifth item, "If I could live my life over, I would change almost nothing." This item functions poorly and reduces instrument reliability. With these revisions, the SWLS is a useful instrument to monitor an important outcome of trauma rehabilitation.

Validation of Fatigue Impact Scale with various item sets - a Rasch analysis.

PURPOSE: Fatigue is a symptom in patients with chronic gastrointestinal (GI) and liver diseases. Different instruments have been developed to assess the severity of fatigue and the 40-item Fatigue Impact Scale (FIS) is among the most widely used. Shorter versions of FIS include the 21-item Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS), and an eight-item version for everyday use. The study aimed to assess construct validity, reliability, and sufficiency of the raw score of the original FIS with 40 items, and examine the sufficiency of the 21 items from the Modified scale and the eight items of the Daily Fatigue Impact Scale (D-FIS), all of which are embedded in the 40-item scale. METHODS: Patients with chronic GI or liver disease (n = 354) completed the FIS with 40 items. The majority (57%) was under the age of 55 years and approximately half were females (48%). Various item sets of FIS were derived which showed fit to the Rasch model. RESULTS: Local dependency and multidimensionality in FIS and the 21-item Modified scale were resolved with a testlet solution but the D-FIS showed local dependency and multidimensionality and differential item functioning (DIF) still remained. Two new item sets fulfilling unidimensionality and no DIF are suggested, one with 15 items and a six-item scale for daily use. The transformation table shows score-interval scale estimates for all these item sets. CONCLUSIONS: Both the FIS and the Modified scale can be used to measure fatigue albeit requiring some adjustment for DIF. The eight-item D-FIS is more problematic, and its summed score is not valid. Alternative 15- and 6-item versions presented in this paper can offer valid summed scores, and the transformation table allows transformation of raw scores and comparisons across all versions. Implications for rehabilitation The Fatigue Impact Scale and the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale can be used to measure fatigue after adjustments for differential item functioning. Alternative 15- and 6-item versions of Fatigue Impact Scale offer valid summed scores. The summed score for the Daily Fatigue Impact Scale is not valid. A transformation table with raw scores and Rasch transformed interval scale metric makes it possible to compare scores derived from the Fatigue Impact Scale, the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale and the proposed 15- and 6-item versions of Fatigue Impact Scale for research and/or clinical use.

Parallel short forms for the assessment of activities of daily living in cardiovascular rehabilitation patients (PADL-cardio): development and validation.

PURPOSE: To develop and validate parallel short forms for the assessment of activities of daily living in cardiac rehabilitation patients (PADL-cardio I & II). METHOD: PADL-cardio I & II were developed based on a sample of 106 patients [mean age = 57.6; standard deviation (SD) = 11.1; 72.6% males] using Rasch analysis and validated with a sample of 81 patients (mean age = 59.1; SD = 11.1; 88.9% males). All patients answered PADL-cardio and the Short Form 12 Health Survey. RESULTS: Both versions of PADL-cardio are composed of 10 items. The fit to the Rasch model was given documented by a non-significant Item-trait interaction score (PADL-cardio I: χ2 = 31.08, df = 30, p = 0.41; PADL-cardio II: χ2 = 45.6, df = 40, p = 0.25). The two versions were free of differential item functioning. Person-separation reliability was 0.72/0.78 and unidimensionality was given. The two versions correlated with r = 0.98 and the correlation between PADL-cardio and the underlying item bank was 0.99 for both versions. Concurrent validity is indicated through correlations with the Short Form 12 Health Survey (r = -0.37 to -0.40). CONCLUSION: PADL-cardio provides a short and psychometrically sound option for the assessment of activities of daily living in cardiovascular rehabilitation patients. The two versions of PADL-cardio are equivalent. Hence, they can be used to reduce practice and retest effects in repeated measurement, facilitating the longitudinal assessment of activities of daily living. Implications for Rehabilitation New parallel test forms for the assessment of activities of daily living in cardiac rehabilitation (PADL-cardio I & PADL-cardio II) are available. PADL-cardio I & II consist of 10 items and are therefore especially timesaving. Concurrent validity is given through correlations with the Short Form Health Survey 12. Therapeutic success could be determined more precisely by the parallel forms reducing practice and retest effects.

The methodological application of goal attainment scaling in pediatric rehabilitation research: a systematic review.

Purpose: The objectives of this review article were to (1) describe the populations and interventions to which Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) has been applied in pediatric rehabilitation, (2) summarize the scientific rigor of published studies utilizing GAS as an outcome measure in pediatric rehabilitation, and (3) illustrate the responsiveness of GAS following intervention.Materials and methods: Four electronic databases were searched for English language, human subject studies. Two reviewers independently extracted data, graded evidence, and rated study quality.Results: Fifty-two studies utilizing GAS as an outcome measure within pediatric rehabilitation were included. A majority of studies were characterized as low-level evidence in the Sackett hierarchy (Sackett levels IV-V; 33 of 52). Quality appraisal scores for all reviewed studies ranged from 1-13 points (17 possible points) and averaged 4.71 points. GAS appeared to detect meaningful change in more than 60% of studies.Conclusions: GAS is a clinically useful tool for measuring progress toward goals, but has not been utilized with a high level of methodological rigor in research. Emphasis on reduced variation in administration and interpretation will strengthen the utility of GAS for efficacy and program evaluation in future research.Implications for rehabilitationGoal Attainment Scaling (GAS) can be used across a diversity of interventions and diagnoses as an outcome measure in pediatric rehabilitation.Careful consideration should be used in the study design to standardize administration and scoring of GAS to strengthen the study.Goal Attainment Scaling is responsive to change, and the tool appears to detect meaningful change the majority of the time in pediatric rehabilitation.

Participant incentives in rehabilitation research: a pilot study of researchers' perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Despite the use of research incentives in the recruitment and retention of participants for research studies, there remains debate over the acceptable use of participant incentives in research. There appears to be a paucity of guidelines that can assist researchers in demonstrating practically how incentives may be ethically used in research. OBJECTIVE: This single site pilot study explored the experiences of key stakeholders involved in rehabilitation research to highlight what may constitute acceptable practices for incentives. METHODS: A qualitative inquiry with use of semi-structured interviews with four key informants from a single site was undertaken. Data was audio-recorded and analysed thematically using deductive reasoning. RESULTS: The findings reflect a description of what incentives constitute; the issues around undue inducement and use of incentives in practice. Participants' offered their perceptions on perceived acceptable versus unacceptable practices in the use incentives in research. Participants shared their concern over research incentives being used to sway participation in research rather than reimburse participants for their expenses or offering a token of appreciation. CONCLUSION: There is a need for education of practitioners and researchers to develop skill to aid researchers to evaluate the ethical dilemmas related to the use of incentives in research.

The generation of consensus guidelines for carrying out process evaluations in rehabilitation research.

BACKGROUND: Although in recent years there has been a strong increase in published research on theories (e.g. realist evaluation, normalization process theory) driving and guiding process evaluations of complex interventions, there is limited guidance to help rehabilitation researchers design and carry out process evaluations. This can lead to the risk of process evaluations being unsystematic. This paper reports on the development of new consensus guidelines that address the specific challenges of conducting process evaluations alongside clinical trials of rehabilitation interventions. METHODS: A formal consensus process was carried out based on a modified nominal group technique, which comprised two phases. Phase I was informed by the findings of a systematic review, and included a nominal group meeting with an expert panel of participants to rate and discuss the proposed statements. Phase II was an in depth semi-structured telephone interviews with expert panel participants in order to further discuss the structure and contents of the revised guidelines. Frequency of rating responses to each statement was calculated and thematic analysis was carried out on all qualitative data. RESULTS: The guidelines for carrying out process evaluations within complex intervention rehabilitation research were produced by combining findings from Phase I and Phase II. The consensus guidelines include recommendations that are grouped in seven sections. These sections are theoretical work, design and methods, context, recruitment and retention, intervention staff, delivery of the intervention and results. These sections represent different aspects or stages of the evaluation process. CONCLUSION: The consensus guidelines here presented can play a role at assisting rehabilitation researchers at the time of designing and conducting process evaluations alongside trials of complex interventions. The guidelines break new ground in terms of concepts and theory and works towards a consensus in regards to how rehabilitation researchers should go about carrying out process evaluations and how this evaluation should be linked into the proposed trials. These guidelines may be used, adapted and tested by rehabilitation researchers depending on the research stage or study design (e.g. feasibility trial, pilot trial, etc.).

Comprehensive systematic review update summary: Disorders of consciousness: Report of the Guideline Development, Dissemination, and Implementation Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology; the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine; and the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research.

OBJECTIVE: To update the 1995 American Academy of Neurology (AAN) practice parameter on persistent vegetative state and the 2002 case definition for the minimally conscious state (MCS) by reviewing the literature on the diagnosis, natural history, prognosis, and treatment of disorders of consciousness lasting at least 28 days. METHODS: Articles were classified per the AAN evidence-based classification system. Evidence synthesis occurred through a modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation process. Recommendations were based on evidence, related evidence, care principles, and inferences according to the AAN 2011 process manual, as amended. RESULTS: No diagnostic assessment procedure had moderate or strong evidence for use. It is possible that a positive EMG response to command, EEG reactivity to sensory stimuli, laser-evoked potentials, and the Perturbational Complexity Index can distinguish MCS from vegetative state/unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (VS/UWS). The natural history of recovery from prolonged VS/UWS is better in traumatic than nontraumatic cases. MCS is generally associated with a better prognosis than VS (conclusions of low to moderate confidence in adult populations), and traumatic injury is generally associated with a better prognosis than nontraumatic injury (conclusions of low to moderate confidence in adult and pediatric populations). Findings concerning other prognostic features are stratified by etiology of injury (traumatic vs nontraumatic) and diagnosis (VS/UWS vs MCS) with low to moderate degrees of confidence. Therapeutic evidence is sparse. Amantadine probably hastens functional recovery in patients with MCS or VS/UWS secondary to severe traumatic brain injury over 4 weeks of treatment. Recommendations are presented separately.

Practice guideline update recommendations summary: Disorders of consciousness: Report of the Guideline Development, Dissemination, and Implementation Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology; the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine; and the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research.

OBJECTIVE: To update the 1995 American Academy of Neurology (AAN) practice parameter on persistent vegetative state and the 2002 case definition on minimally conscious state (MCS) and provide care recommendations for patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness (DoC). METHODS: Recommendations were based on systematic review evidence, related evidence, care principles, and inferences using a modified Delphi consensus process according to the AAN 2011 process manual, as amended. RECOMMENDATIONS: Clinicians should identify and treat confounding conditions, optimize arousal, and perform serial standardized assessments to improve diagnostic accuracy in adults and children with prolonged DoC (Level B). Clinicians should counsel families that for adults, MCS (vs vegetative state [VS]/unresponsive wakefulness syndrome [UWS]) and traumatic (vs nontraumatic) etiology are associated with more favorable outcomes (Level B). When prognosis is poor, long-term care must be discussed (Level A), acknowledging that prognosis is not universally poor (Level B). Structural MRI, SPECT, and the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised can assist prognostication in adults (Level B); no tests are shown to improve prognostic accuracy in children. Pain always should be assessed and treated (Level B) and evidence supporting treatment approaches discussed (Level B). Clinicians should prescribe amantadine (100-200 mg bid) for adults with traumatic VS/UWS or MCS (4-16 weeks post injury) to hasten functional recovery and reduce disability early in recovery (Level B). Family counseling concerning children should acknowledge that natural history of recovery, prognosis, and treatment are not established (Level B). Recent evidence indicates that the term chronic VS/UWS should replace permanent VS, with duration specified (Level B). Additional recommendations are included.

Developing an integrative level-dimensional taxonomy model for rehabilitation psychology research and practice.

OBJECTIVE: The present article concerns the development of a taxonomy model for organizing and classifying all aspects of rehabilitation psychology from an integrative level-dimensional conceptualization. This conceptualization is presented as an alternative to a primarily categorical approach to classification. It also assumes a continuity perspective for all aspects of behavior and experience. DESIGN: Development of this taxonomy model involves organizing information relevant to levels/domains of all aspects of behavior and experience, and to constructs describing their underlying components conceptually as well as dimensions which constitute the measurable basis of constructs. RESULTS: A taxonomy model with levels/domains, representative examples of constructs and dimensions is presented as a foundation for development of the present taxonomy model, with specific relevance to rehabilitation psychology. CONCLUSIONS: This integrative level-dimensional taxonomy model provides a structure for organizing all aspects of rehabilitation psychology relevant to understanding, assessing, and influencing the rehabilitation process. Suggestions for development and research are provided for the taxonomy model. (PsycINFO Database Record

On the Reporting of Experimental and Control Therapies in Stroke Rehabilitation Trials: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To use the Centralized Open-Access Rehabilitation database for Stroke to explore reporting of both experimental and control interventions in randomized controlled trials for stroke rehabilitation (including upper and lower extremity therapies). DATA SOURCES: The Centralized Open-Access Rehabilitation database for Stroke was created from a search of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health from the earliest available date to May 31, 2014. STUDY SELECTION: A total of 2892 titles were reduced to 514 that were screened by full text. This screening left 215 randomized controlled trials in the database (489 independent groups representing 12,847 patients). DATA EXTRACTION: Using a mixture of qualitative and quantitative methods, we performed a text-based analysis of how the procedures of experimental and control therapies were described. Experimental and control groups were rated by 2 independent coders according to the Template for Intervention Description and Replication criteria. DATA SYNTHESIS: Linear mixed-effects regression with a random effect of study (groups nested within studies) showed that experimental groups had statistically more words in their procedures (mean, 271.8 words) than did control groups (mean, 154.8 words) (P<.001). Experimental groups had statistically more references in their procedures (mean, 1.60 references) than did control groups (mean, .82 references) (P<.001). Experimental groups also scored significantly higher on the total Template for Intervention Description and Replication checklist (mean score, 7.43 points) than did control groups (mean score, 5.23 points) (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Control treatments in stroke motor rehabilitation trials are underdescribed relative to experimental treatments. These poor descriptions are especially problematic for "conventional" therapy control groups. Poor reporting is a threat to the internal validity and generalizability of clinical trial results. We recommend authors use preregistered protocols and established reporting criteria to improve transparency.

Moving research tools into practice: the successes and challenges in promoting uptake of classification tools.

PURPOSE: In this paper, we present our experiences - both successes and challenges - in implementing evidence-based classification tools into clinical practice. We also make recommendations for others wanting to promote the uptake and application of new research-based assessment tools. METHOD: We first describe classification systems and the benefits of using them in both research and practice. We then present a theoretical framework from Implementation Science to report strategies we have used to implement two research-based classification tools into practice. We also illustrate some of the challenges we have encountered by reporting results from an online survey investigating 58 Speech-language Pathologists' knowledge and use of the Communication Function Classification System (CFCS), a new tool to classify children's functional communication skills. RESULT AND CONCLUSIONS: We offer recommendations for researchers wanting to promote the uptake of new tools in clinical practice. Specifically, we identify structural, organizational, innovation, practitioner, and patient-related factors that we recommend researchers address in the design of implementation interventions. Roles and responsibilities of both researchers and clinicians in making implementations science a success are presented. Implications for rehabilitation Promoting uptake of new and evidence-based tools into clinical practice is challenging. Implementation science can help researchers to close the knowledge-to-practice gap. Using concrete examples, we discuss our experiences in implementing evidence-based classification tools into practice within a theoretical framework. Recommendations are provided for researchers wanting to implement new tools in clinical practice. Implications for researchers and clinicians are presented.

Qualitative research in rehabilitation science: opportunities, challenges, and future directions.

PURPOSE: Qualitative research has had a significant impact within rehabilitation science over time. During the past 20 years the number of qualitative studies published per year in Disability and Rehabilitation has markedly increased (from 1 to 54). In addition, during this period there have been significant changes in how qualitative research is conceptualized, conducted, and utilized to advance the field of rehabilitation. The purpose of this article is to reflect upon the progress of qualitative research within rehabilitation to date, to explicate current opportunities and challenges, and to suggest future directions to continue to strengthen the contribution of qualitative research in this field. METHODS: Relevant literature searches were conducted in electronic data bases and reference lists. Pertinent literature was examined to identify current opportunities and challenges for qualitative research use in rehabilitation and to identify future directions. RESULTS: Six key areas of opportunity and challenge were identified: (a) paradigm shifts, (b) advancements in methodology, (c) emerging technology, (d) advances in quality evaluation, (e) increasing popularity of mixed methods approaches, and (f) evolving approaches to knowledge translation. Two important future directions for rehabilitation are posited: (1) advanced training in qualitative methods and (2) engaging qualitative communities of research. CONCLUSION: Qualitative research is well established in rehabilitation and has an important place in the continued growth of this field. Ongoing development of qualitative researchers and methods are essential. Implications for Rehabilitation Qualitative research has the potential to improve rehabilitation practice by addressing some of the most pervasive concerns in the field such as practitioner-client interaction, the subjective and lived experience of disability, and clinical reasoning and decision making. This will serve to better inform those providing rehabilitation services thereby benefiting patients that are utilizing these services. Changes over time in how qualitative research is conceptualized, conducted, and utilized to advance rehabilitation science have resulted in a number of unique opportunities and challenges in using qualitative research that must be considered within this field. Advances in methodology and increased expectations for evaluation must be considered to ensure quality and credibility of qualitative rehabilitation research within rehabilitation. Improved quality and credibility may increase likelihood of research dissemination and use by clinicians intervening within the rehabilitation process in order to improve clinical practice. In order to maximize opportunities and mitigate challenges there are two principal future directions for rehabilitation scientists to consider: (1) advancing training in qualitative methods to adequately prepare future rehabilitation scientists and (2) engaging qualitative communities of research.

Improving the Development, Monitoring and Reporting of Stroke Rehabilitation Research: Consensus-Based Core Recommendations from the Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable.

Recent reviews have demonstrated that the quality of stroke rehabilitation research has continued to improve over the last four decades but despite this progress, there are still many barriers in moving the field forward. Rigorous development, monitoring and complete reporting of interventions in stroke trials are essential in providing rehabilitation evidence that is robust, meaningful and implementable. An international partnership of stroke rehabilitation experts committed to develop consensus-based core recommendations with a remit of addressing the issues identified as limiting stroke rehabilitation research in the areas of developing, monitoring and reporting stroke rehabilitation interventions. Work exploring each of the three areas took place via multiple teleconferences and a two-day meeting in Philadelphia in May 2016. A total of 15 recommendations were made. To validate the need for the recommendations, the group reviewed all stroke rehabilitation trials published in 2015 (n=182 papers). Our review highlighted that the majority of publications did not clearly describe how interventions were developed or monitored during the trial. In particular, under-reporting of the theoretical rationale for the intervention and the components of the intervention call into question many interventions that have been evaluated for efficacy. More trials were found to have addressed the reporting of interventions recommendations than those related to development or monitoring. Nonetheless, the majority of reporting recommendations were still not adequately described. To progress the field of stroke rehabilitation research and to ensure stroke patients receive optimal evidence-based clinical care, we urge the research community to endorse and adopt our recommendations.