SZ and attribution

3 database: pubmed, ebscohost, psyinfo.

reference:
1. 林恭宏, 黃怡靜, 尤菀薈, 薛漪平, & 謝清麟. (2014). 常用於精神分裂症研究之持續性注意力評估工具及其心理計量特性回顧. 臺灣職能治療研究與實務雜誌, 10(1), 33-48.
2. 林恭宏, 陳明輝, 黃小玲, 李士捷, & 謝清麟. (2015). 常用於中風病人之工作記憶評估工具及其心理計量特性回顧. 職能治療學會雜誌, 33(1), 71-97.

CFA model paper

confirmatory factor analysis[ti/ab] AND psychiatry research[journal name]
Items: 14
2017: 3篇
2015, 
Portuguese version of the PTSD Checklist-Military Version (PCL-M)-I: Confirmatory Factor Analysis and reliability

Respecified first and second-order models according to DSM-IValso presented an acceptable fit.
這篇可能與我們想寫的那篇，架構比較像。


confirmatory factor analysis[ti/ab] AND schizophrenia research[journal name]
Items: 6
2017: 1篇

confirmatory factor analysis[ti/ab] AND BMC psychiatry[journal name]
Items: 2
2017: 1篇/ 2016: 1篇

107統籌款

松德通過9件：其中，OT 1件，48萬(10個月人事費)。

拜託大家幫忙找尋大學以上研究助理。
106-12-11, 貼出公告。


Test-retest reliabilities and minimal detectable change of two selective attention measures in patients with schizophrenia.
ref.
Chen, Yi M., et al. "Test-retest reliabilities and minimal detectable change of two simplified 3-level balance measures in patients with stroke." European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine (2017).

cat SoFun, 2nd to 3rd year

2nd to 3rd year:

1.參考social cognition的架構
2. 題庫確認：12月
3.研究方法：院內研究員、統計諮詢、另2計劃案

4.107上半年，用Ruff27的人收案。

欠文章
1. Ruff27, practice effect
2. RSFST, MDCand CFA

期滿離職

出國進修半年，回國服務期滿，準備出國深造。
結論是，未來3年，其他人考慮不能參加國際會議。

邏輯是?
A有問題，剩餘B-Z受罰。剩下的是侯?
生命中，美好的事情這麼多。
是眼睛太小到看不見? 
就連鼻子都縮水到堵住?


這出國參加研討會，或許也可以換個方向做做看。
有道理。

Validation of Ruff 2 & 7

107統籌款計畫

2018 AOTA Proposal Submission- about Reproducibility of the Revised Social Functioning Scale–short version in community-dwelling patients with schizophrenia

The response to this year's Call for Papers was exceptional with nearly 1,900 submissions which is the second largest number of submissions in AOTA’s Call for Papers history. The competition for available space was steep and many excellent proposals simply could not be scheduled. Approximately 1,300 submissions were accepted for presentation (1,000 of these are poster presentations). The acceptance rate was approximately 70%. The growth of the Annual Conference has driven us to reserve the entire Salt Palace Convention Center, add an additional poster session, and more exciting features that will be announced in the coming months.

Regretfully, we were unable to schedule your proposal for presentation. The average score your proposal received is indicated in the link below; this score is based on a scale of 0 - 45. It is possible that you received a high score, but still were not selected due to competition for time slots within a specific topic category.

Please click the link below to view reviewer comments.

http://e.ctt.bz/e.asp?e=B2FB3EFA-BD4A-40E0-8AD2-AB9ED400EFE8

(If link fails to open, please copy and paste entire URL into a new browser.)

The proposals were scored electronically by your colleagues in a blind review format. Each submission was reviewed by at least 4 different reviewers for general proposals and at least 3 different reviewers for research proposals. Scores from all reviewers were averaged. Top scoring proposals within each topic category were selected for presentation based upon the space(s) allotted in that topic category and session format. In some cases, there was more than one high scoring proposal dealing with a very similar subject matter; unfortunately in that instance hard choices had to be made by the selection committee.

This notification has been sent to the Primary Speaker ONLY. As the Primary Speaker you are responsible for contacting your Additional Speakers and forwarding any information they need.

Thank you for sharing your conference proposal with AOTA. We appreciate your participation and hope that you will submit a proposal for future conferences. A successful, relevant, and meaningful Annual Conference is dependent on professionals like yourself, committed to sharing knowledge with their peers….we applaud you and appreciate your efforts. We hope you will join us at the 2018 Annual Conference & Expo in Salt Lake City, UT. Complete program information will be available on the AOTA website in mid-December.

Sincerely,

Frank E. Gainer, MHS, OTR/L, FAOTA, CMP, CAE

Director of Conferences

_{Control Number: 3520}

Ruff 2 & 7

iSAT responsiveness_final

許惠敏將向林依俐請教PANSS.
1.再請芸帆及乃瑜與惠敏確認可收案的日期。
2. recheck iSAT's REC permission interval. or Ruff27's REC interval?
3. based on 2, think again: iSAT or Ruff responsiveness?
3.1 iSAT's REC, i think, till this year. that means this research cannot go on. postpone?
3.2 Ruff27, yes i may do it. but how about the responsiveness of CPT and Stroop?

about author

作者的定義

誰可以掛名為作者？根據美國心理學學會（American Psychological Association, 2010）的定義，作者並不一定只是論文寫作的人，凡對此研究有實質貢獻，例如：擬定研究問題或假設者、建構實驗設計、組織及進行統計分析者、詮釋研究結果者、主筆撰寫研究報告者等人，便有資格成為作者之一。然而，在研究中若只擔負單一功能的人員，例如：建議或指導統計分析、蒐集或鍵入資料、修改或撰寫電腦程式、幫忙招募受試者等，這些人則沒有足夠的資格成為作者。論文的作者如果想要對上述提及的人員表示感謝，可以在論文的「致謝」（acknowledgement）中表明謝意。


話雖如此；但，會不會把事情想得太單純。