April 5, 2021
At webFCE, all of our tests and procedures are rooted in peer-reviewed research. Why? So that you can stand behind our reports with confidence. Thanks to the rock-solid evidence it provides, the FCE report is a legally defensible document that holds up in any court of law. Therefore, today on the blog, we’re proud to showcase data from the peer-reviewed research that undergirds our valid, reliable FCE software. WebFCE testing achieved:
- DOT-RFC Battery demonstrates a 5/5 for face validity (2,3).
- DOT-RFC Battery demonstrates a 5/5 for construct validity (2,3).
- DOT-RFC Battery demonstrates moderate to good content validity (2,3).
- DOT-RFC Battery demonstrates Test-Re test reliability and Intra rater reliability (1, 4).
- DOT-RFC battery demonstrates some predictive validity in the “real work world.”(2).
Note: 5/5 = Validity, with sufficient detail to enable examination of the results, is reported and published in a peer-reviewed forum (i.e., peer-reviewed journal).
WebFCE (DOT-RFC) showed excellent face/content Validity (5/5) and construct validity (5/5). Validity that has sufficient detail to enable examination of test results, and is published in a peer-reviewed journal (page 134, 135). Out of all the FCE’s on the market (28 in total), The DOT-RFC is the only assessment that has content validity established (page 141).
Deliver a solid report your customers can rely on – without hassle. Click here to discover how our valid, reliable FCE can get to work in your clinic.
References:
- Fishbain AA, et al. Measuring residual functional capacity in chronic low back pain patients based on the Dictionary of Occupational Titles, SPINE 1994; 19(8):872-880.
- Fishbain AA, et al. Validity of the Dictionary of Occupational Titles-Residual Functional Capacity Battery. Clin J Pain 1999; 15(2):102-110.
- Ev Innes and Leon Straker. Validity of Work-Related Assessments. Work 1999; 13(2):125-152.
- Ev Innes and Leon Straker. Reliability of Work-Related Assessments. Work 1999; 13(2):107-124.