Australian occupational therapy research: A review of publications 1987–91

Abstract

The aim of this study was to describe the characteristics of Australian occupational therapy research published during the period 1987–91. A literature review of the Australian Occupational Therapy Journal for the years 1987–91, and the Australian Association of Occupational Therapists' conference proceedings for the years 1988 and 1991 was conducted. A number of trends were identified. The proportion of research journal articles and conference papers over the 5 year period remained stable. Most journal research articles were written by academics, while clinicians were the most frequent authors of conference research papers. The majority of the research articles reviewed were the result of collaboration between authors; however, this collaboration was not usually between occupational therapy academics and clinicians. Research was predominantly on topics related to practice in clinical specialty areas; however, academics focused more on education and professional issues. The main method for data collection used in the research articles was by surveys. These findings provide valuable information about the nature of Australian occupational therapy research.

Content Analysis of Five Occupational Therapy Journals, 2006–2010: Further Review of Characteristics of the Quantitative Literature

“…Likewise, Cusick (1995) analyzed the publications in AOTJ from 1987 to 1991 and found only 42% of the publications could be classified as research based. More recently, Gutman (2011) examined AJOT from 2008 to 2011 and found that studies testing treatment effectiveness and rigor of experimental design had steadily increased; however, examination of practice efficacy was lacking.…”

Child and Youth Practice Area Publications in the American Journal of Occupational Therapy in 2008 and 2009: A Content Analysis, Methodology Overview, and Summary

“…The most common qualitative research design used was grounded theory, with 15.4% (n 5 6) of AJOT studies reporting its use. ; and Cusick (1995) all observed that the level of rigor and methodological sophistication of occupational therapy studies being published in journals is increasing.…”

Occupational therapy publications by Australian authors: A bibliometric analysis

“…Several content reviews of AOTJ articles have been published previously (e.g. Bell & Anderson, ; Cusick, ; Madill, Brintnell & Stewin, ; Ziviani, Behan & Rodger, ). Ziviani et al .…”

“…A total of 78 articles from each 5‐year period were examined and it was noted that articles increasingly addressed professional promotion in the wider community and there was a need for a unifying Australian occupational therapy conceptual framework. Cusick described the traits of occupational therapy research literature published from 1987 to 1991 by conducting a literature review of AOTJ and the Australian Association of Occupational Therapists' conference proceedings. It was determined that the proportion of research articles published in AOTJ and presented at national conferences remained consistent during the 5‐year period.…”

“…Several content reviews of AOTJ articles have been published previously (e.g. Bell & Anderson, 1988;Cusick, 1995;Madill, Brintnell & Stewin, 1989;Ziviani, Behan & Rodger, 1984). Ziviani et al completed a comparison review of the BJOT, AJOT and AOTJ from 1970 to 1982.…”