Finkenflügel Harry, Cornielje Huib, Velema Johan
Institute of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus MC University Medical Centre Rotterdam, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Disabil Rehabil. 2008;30(5):348-54. doi: 10.1080/09638280701257288.
Classification models for community-based rehabilitation (CBR) create conceptual order in the many types of rehabilitation programmes that exist in developing countries. Several models have been developed but none of the models appears to be widely accepted or being used in the evaluation process.
To review classification models and assess its usability.
Literature review.
Sixteen documents were found describing 11 different models. These models vary from simply listing different types of CBR to multidimensional configurations encircling principles, methods and outcomes of CBR. The models are only incidentally used in the evaluation of CBR programmes. The more recent models have been used to develop, select and group indicators.
Classification models can indeed structure the evaluation and comparison of CBR programs that are, by nature, very different from each other. Indicators can be developed within a theoretical framework provided by the classification model. In order to be widely accepted the models should be made less complex and focus on outcomes that are meaningful for the people involved in the evaluation as well as for policymakers and researchers.
基于社区的康复(CBR)分类模型为发展中国家现有的多种康复项目建立了概念秩序。已经开发了几种模型,但似乎没有一种模型在评估过程中得到广泛接受或被使用。
回顾分类模型并评估其可用性。
文献综述。
发现16份文献描述了11种不同的模型。这些模型从简单列出不同类型的CBR到围绕CBR的原则、方法和结果的多维配置各不相同。这些模型仅偶尔用于CBR项目的评估。较新的模型已用于制定、选择和分组指标。
分类模型确实可以构建对本质上差异很大的CBR项目的评估和比较。可以在分类模型提供的理论框架内制定指标。为了被广泛接受,模型应简化,关注对参与评估的人员以及政策制定者和研究人员有意义的结果。