(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