BhandariMTemplemanDTornettaP (2004) Interrater reliability in grading abstracts for the orthopaedic trauma association. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 423, 217–21.
2.
CallahamMLWearsRLWeberEJBartonCYoungG (1998) Positive-outcome bias and other limitations in the outcome of research abstracts submitted to a scientific meeting. Journal of the American Medical Association, 280(3), 254–57.
3.
RubinHRRedelmeierDAWuAWSteinbergEP (1993) How reliable is peer review of scientific abstracts? Looking back at the 1991 Annual Meeting of the Society of General Internal Medicine. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 8(5), 255–58.
4.
SmithJNixonRBueschenAJVenableDDHenryHH (2002) Impact of blinded versus unblinded abstract review on scientific program content. Journal of Urology, 168, 2123–25.
5.
BonifaceGFeddenTHurstHMasonMPhelpsCReagonCWaygoodS (2008) Using theory to underpin an integrated occupational therapy service through the Canadian Model of Occupational Performance. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 71(12), 531–39.
6.
CreekJ (2009) Achieving a higher level of expertise. (Letter.)British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 72(2), 90.
7.
LawMBaptisteSCarswellAMcCollMAPolatajkoHJPollockN (2005) Canadian Occupational Therapy Performance Measure. 4th ed.Ottawa, ON: CAOT Publications ACE.
