These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed


  • Title: Sharing the agenda: pondering the politics and practices of occupational therapy research.
    Author: Hammell KR, Miller WC, Forwell SJ, Forman BE, Jacobsen BA.
    Journal: Scand J Occup Ther; 2012 May; 19(3):297-304. PubMed ID: 21631173.
    Abstract:
    AIMS: Occupational therapists espouse a client-centred philosophy of practice, yet little attention has been given to pondering the politics or client-centred practices of occupational therapy research. The aim of this paper is thus to foster reflection on occupational therapy's commitment to client-centredness in the practice of occupational therapy research. MAJOR FINDINGS: Occupational therapy research is not consistently undertaken in a collaborative manner. Power resides in control of the research agenda and participants' priorities can be supplanted by those of researchers. However, examples from the literature and from the authors' research suggest that study participants may wish to influence the research agenda such that their needs and priorities are addressed. PRACTICE CONCLUSION: Client-centred principles appear to require occupational therapists to undertake collaborative research and to ensure that research agendas are informed by clients' priorities. Commitment to client-centred principles demands concerted efforts to identify and address potential barriers to meaningful client participation in the occupation of research. However, it is argued that if researchers and disabled people collaborate, and pool their knowledge and expertise, they may achieve research that is more philosophically compatible with espoused professional values; and that collaborative research may also inform more relevant and useful client-centred clinical practices.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]