HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when Rapid Responses are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Rothstein, J. M Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Rothstein, J. M Related Collections Research: Other All Editorials Jules Rothstein Related Articles Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

In This Issue

This excerpt was created in the absence of an abstract.

Many physical therapy practitioners complain that the research they come across in the literature is esoteric and irrelevant. Often they are right! Not surprisingly, those who have waded through research articles only to find them indecipherable or immaterial are unlikely to read the two articles on research topics in this issue. I can understand this initial reaction, but if the feeling of aversion keeps people from these articles, readers will miss some important and useful dialogue. The purpose of both papers is to enhance relevance and to beseech researchers to consider how they might better illuminate important issues in physical therapy.

Sim and Arnell challenge researchers to address the issue of measurement validity more fully and directly. As someone who has written extensively on this topic, I can appreciate the feeling of dread that overcomes the average practitioner when the subject is raised....

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

Related Articles

Measurement Validity in Physical Therapy Research

Julius Sim and Peggy Arnell
Physical Therapy 1993 73: 102-110. [Abstract] [PDF]