124 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11506218)
1. Key dimensions of client satisfaction with assistive technology: a cross-validation of a Canadian measure in The Netherlands.
Demers L; Wessels R; Weiss-Lambrou R; Ska B; De Witte LP
J Rehabil Med; 2001 Jul; 33(4):187-91. PubMed ID: 11506218
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (QUEST 2.0): the development of the Taiwanese version.
Mao HF; Chen WY; Yao G; Huang SL; Lin CC; Huang WN
Clin Rehabil; 2010 May; 24(5):412-21. PubMed ID: 20442253
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Item analysis of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (QUEST).
Demers L; Weiss-Lambrou R; Ska B
Assist Technol; 2000; 12(2):96-105. PubMed ID: 11508406
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Development of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology (QUEST).
Demers L; Weiss-Lambrou R; Ska B
Assist Technol; 1996; 8(1):3-13. PubMed ID: 10159726
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The validity and applicability of the Chinese version of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction With Assistive Technology for people with spinal cord injury.
Chan SC; Chan AP
Assist Technol; 2006; 18(1):25-33. PubMed ID: 16796239
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Validation of the Greek version of the device subscale of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology 2.0 (QUEST 2.0).
Koumpouros Y; Karavasili A; Papageorgiou E; Siavelis P
Assist Technol; 2016; 28(3):152-8. PubMed ID: 26854178
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Translation into Arabic of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology 2.0 and validation in orthosis users.
Bakhsh H; Franchignoni F; Ferriero G; Giordano A; Demers L
Int J Rehabil Res; 2014 Dec; 37(4):361-7. PubMed ID: 25305007
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Reliability and validity of the Dutch version of QUEST 2.0 with users of various types of assistive devices.
Wessels RD; De Witte LP
Disabil Rehabil; 2003 Mar; 25(6):267-72. PubMed ID: 12623616
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Exploring Validity, Reliability, and Factor Analysis of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology in an Italian Population: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Galeoto G; Colucci M; Guarino D; Esposito G; Cosma E; De Santis R; Grifoni G; Valente D; Tofani M
Occup Ther Health Care; 2018 Oct; 32(4):380-392. PubMed ID: 30596451
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A systematic review of the psychometric properties of Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology (QUEST).
Aledda S; Galeoto G; Fabbrini G; Lucibello L; Tofani M; Conte A; Berardi A
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol; 2024 May; 19(4):1228-1235. PubMed ID: 36645802
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The Rasch Analysis Shows Poor Construct Validity and Low Reliability of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology 2.0 (QUEST 2.0) Questionnaire.
Caronni A; Ramella M; Arcuri P; Salatino C; Pigini L; Saruggia M; Folini C; Scarano S; Converti RM
Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2023 Jan; 20(2):. PubMed ID: 36673791
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Translation and validation of the assistive technology device predisposition assessment in Greek in order to assess satisfaction with use of the selected assistive device.
Koumpouros Y; Papageorgiou E; Karavasili A; Alexopoulou D
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol; 2017 Jul; 12(5):535-542. PubMed ID: 27049479
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Translation and validation of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (QUEST 2.0) into Portuguese].
de Carvalho KE; Gois Júnior MB; Sá KN
Rev Bras Reumatol; 2014; 54(4):260-7. PubMed ID: 25627220
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Field testing of two electronic mobility aid devices for persons who are deaf-blind.
Vincent C; Routhier F; Martel V; Mottard MÈ; Dumont F; Côté L; Cloutier D
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol; 2014 Sep; 9(5):414-20. PubMed ID: 24266810
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Development of a metric to evaluate the ergonomic principles of assistive systems, based on the DIN 92419.
Xavier Macedo de Azevedo F; Heimgärtner R; Nebe K
Ergonomics; 2023 Jun; 66(6):821-848. PubMed ID: 36137226
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Reliability and validity of the Italian version of Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology 2.0 (QUEST-IT 2.0) with users of mobility assistive device.
Colucci M; Tofani M; Trioschi D; Guarino D; Berardi A; Galeoto G
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol; 2021 Apr; 16(3):251-254. PubMed ID: 31553245
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. User satisfaction with mobility assistive devices: an important element in the rehabilitation process.
samuelsson K; Wressle E
Disabil Rehabil; 2008; 30(7):551-8. PubMed ID: 17852301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. KWAZO, a new instrument to assess the quality of service delivery in assistive technology provision.
Dijcks BP; Wessels RD; de Vlieger SL; Post MW
Disabil Rehabil; 2006 Aug; 28(15):909-14. PubMed ID: 16861198
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Reliability, validity, and applicability of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology (QUEST 2.0) for adults with multiple sclerosis.
Demers L; Monette M; Lapierre Y; Arnold DL; Wolfson C
Disabil Rehabil; 2002 Jan 10-Feb 15; 24(1-3):21-30. PubMed ID: 11827151
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Predicting satisfaction with assistive technology for a sample of adults with new spinal cord injuries.
Scherer MJ; Cushman LA
Psychol Rep; 2000 Dec; 87(3 Pt 1):981-7. PubMed ID: 11191417
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
