title: What do clinicians need from a rehabilitation treatment taxonomy? An alternate approach for describing treatment content versus process.
abstract: Clinician feedback and thought processes about treatment classification and description will aid development of the rehabilitation treatment taxonomy (RTT) presented in this supplement. Here, we discuss comparisons between the proposed RTT and an inductive practice-based evidence (PBE) model used to describe rehabilitation treatments. Interviews with clinicians well versed with PBE highlight the complexity of rehabilitation treatments, and bring to light potential advantages and challenges of a deductive, theory-driven classification to uncover the black box of rehabilitation.
authors.affiliation: Center for Neurorestoration and Neurotechnology, Providence VA Medical Center, Providence, RI; Brown University, Providence, RI. Electronic address: Susan.Fasoli@va.gov.
authors.forename: Susan E
authors.initials: SE
authors.lastname: Fasoli
authors.affiliation: Department of Rehabilitation and Regenerative Medicine, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY.
authors.forename: Christine C
authors.initials: CC
authors.lastname: Chen
mesh_terms: D006233:Persons with Disabilities / Q000534:rehabilitation*; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine / Q000458:organization & administration*; D005246:Feedback; D006801:Humans; D010347:Patient Care Planning / Q000458:organization & administration; D059825:Physical Therapists / Q000523:psychology*; D026761:Physical Therapy Specialty / Q000145:classification* / Q000458:organization & administration*
keywords: Classification; Health services research; PBE; POC; RTT; Rehabilitation; point of care; practice-based evidence; rehabilitation treatment taxonomy