OCTOBRE 2014_NO.3 - Page 32

(PEM-CY): PRELIMINARY FINDINGS 32 METHODS Following ethics approval from the Centre de recherche interdisciplinaire en réadaptation du Montréal métropolitain (CRIR), convenience sampling in combination with a snowball approach was used to recruit youth with and without disabilities age 12 to 17 who were able to communicate and engage in discussion in English and interpret 7-point scale. Youth were excluded if they had a cognitive impairment that prevented them from expressing ideas. All participants provided their written assent and their parents signed an informed consent. A two-phase mixed methods design with a qualitative focus was employed. Phase 1 comprised of individual interviews, which included an occupational therapy student administering the PEM-CY to each participant in a quiet location and following a semi-structured interview guide. For each setting within the assessment, participants were asked to rate the level of clarity of items and relevancy of examples for the target population using two Visual Analog Scales (VAS). These scales consisted of a 10 cm line with the following questions: “To what extent do you feel the questions are clear?” and “To what extent do you think the activities include relevant examples?”. This quantitative data was analyzed using descriptive statistics; means, medians and ranges of the VAS scores were recorded. As well, the number of activities youth reported participating in more than once (out of total 25 activities) was counted and presented in percentages. Number of “never” responses in the frequency scale was also recorded. For the analysis of the qualitative data, interviews were transcribed, coded and content analysis was performed to generate main themes (qualitative data) (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005). This process resulted in a list of suggested modifications to the PEM-CY that were then presented to a group of five youth during a discussion group - Phase 2. This meeting, facilitated by three researchers, involved a discussion of the findings generated in the interviews (Phase 1). Key information was extracted from the recording of the discussion group and compared/contrasted to the qualitative findings from the individual interviews (phase 1) in order to further validate and complement initial findings. Finally, the information generated from both phases (i.e., the interviews and discussion meeting) were synthesized and integrated to account for the comprehensiveness and relevance of a youth version of the PEM-CY. RESULTS SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS Ten adolescents participated in the study; six with disabilities and 4 without disabilities ranging in age between 12 and 17 years (mean=14.5). Five youth participated in phase 1 (3 with and 2 without disabilities) and the remaining five participants (3 with and 2 without disabilities) took part in phase 2 - the discussion meeting. There was representation of both genders and all ages for those with a disability; however, there were only females for those without a disability and they were less varied in age. Orthopaedic impairment was the primary disability for five of the youth with disabilities, yet developmental delay and intellectual disability or specific learning disability was also reported in few Erg