RCSLT Online Outcome Tool

Therapy Outcome Measures

FAQ

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

TOMs

There is information to guide your decision-making on page 9 of the TOM User Guide (Enderby and John, 2019) and page 9 of the TOM Handbook (2025). Often ROOT users ask about whether it is acceptable to use a specific TOM scale when patients have communication or swallowing difficulties or features of behaviour which align to that scale but do not have a confirmed diagnosis. It is recommended that you choose the scale that best fits the person’s needs and the focus of therapy. For example, a child may have language difficulties, but not a formal diagnosis of developmental language disorder, perhaps because they are too young or because their difficulties are in association with another biomedical condition. It would still be appropriate to use scale 6, if language is the focus of intervention.
You should use an adapted scale when an appropriate one is available—this assists reliability. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.27]
You can use the TOM core scale to indicate the severity of the impairment, limitation in activity, social participation and level of wellbeing of the individual and their carer when relevant and there is no suitable adapted scale. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.27]
You should rate the impairment necessitating the intervention. However, if there is more than one disorder requiring intervention, rate the primary disorder (stimulating the referral at this time) first under impairment 1, the other under impairment 2. We suggest using the multifactorial or the multiple difficulties adapted scale if there are more than 2 impairments. The aetiology is the underlying medical condition, e.g., stroke or dementia, whereas the impairment reflects the therapy diagnosis, e.g., dysphasia or cognitive disorder. Sometimes, of course, they are the same. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.27]
The overarching condition necessitating the intervention is the primary impairment. Identifying this assists in aggregating appropriate data for reporting purposes. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.27]
The TOM is a clinician-reported outcome measure, meaning that the rating made for each of the domains – including carer wellbeing – reflects the clinician’s professional judgement. Nevertheless, it is best practice to gather information from assessments, referral information, observation and other reports as well as determining the service users’ and their carers’ views on levels of impairment, activity, participation and wellbeing. Use this information to inform the TOM. A Patient Reported Outcome Measure (TOM-PROM) (also suitable for carers) is now available.* [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.27] *Please note that it is not possible to record the TOM-PROM on the ROOT. For more information about the TOM-PROM, please refer to page 350 of the TOM Handbook (2025).
No, it has been found to be difficult to attribute a particular level of participation or wellbeing to a specific condition so these levels reflect the individual’s overall participation and wellbeing. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.28]
For an outcome to be measured, you need to be able to make two assessments to assess the change (if any) associated with the intervention. This usually involves more than one appointment to ensure outcomes are reflected. At the first appointment you may undertake formal or informal assessments, provide advice and recommend an intervention such as equipment provision or particular exercises/practice. You need to have contact again to determine the impact your input has made. Thus the TOM, like any other outcome measure, needs two ratings. However, if you can make two TOM ratings following one session, then do so. For example, the immediate intervention can be advising on a strategy, such as modified diet, coordination or sequencing of activities, aids or adaptations. This may result in an immediate change in function or socialization and should be captured in the second TOM rating. Some services undertake an audit of their services by contacting a random sample of clients who have only been seen once a few weeks later, by phone or in person, to re-evaluate using the TOM for a second time. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.28]
An outcome measure is used to record the impact of an intervention. The TOM is rated once an intervention is planned and treatment goals are set even if this is the provision of advice. A second rating is made when the episode of intervention is complete. Do not carry out a TOM rating if you are only completing an assessment and do not expect this to lead to anything such as advice or provision of equipment. However, you may wish to provide a report of all referrals to your service and then it would be important to gather information including TOM and ICD. Such a report is often required by funders. Please see response to question above if you are seeing the individual for assessment and advice only. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.28]
It may be appropriate for you to only enter the initial rating and then the discharge code. However, if you have seen the individual a couple of times before they become unable/unwilling to continue you should complete the final rating reflecting how they presented the last time that you worked with them if you have sufficient information, as well as noting the appropriate discharge code. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.28]
If you use the TOM when you assess the client you can then report (to the funder) on the types and levels of need of those being referred to the service. It is also worth considering, “How do you know that assessment and advice services are of benefit?” You can use the TOM to conduct an audit of those receiving assessment and advice only by reviewing a percentage of those you have seen a few weeks after you saw them (and had used the TOM) to determine the impact of your intervention. In some circumstances you can do the follow-up TOM on the telephone. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.29]
The carer wellbeing rating is optional and should reflect the level of concern, anxiety or frustration experienced by the carer at the start and end of intervention. It is usually used if you are providing direct input to the carer or when you expect to have an impact on carer wellbeing. If you are not intervening with the carer then you will not need to rate carer wellbeing. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.29]
Activity concerns the overall performance/independence of the individual in, for example, communication, walking and activities of daily living. Rate the individual’s overall and general performance. Do not rate what the person is capable of doing, rate what they are doing overall. If it is important for you to record a specific activity, then record it separately, e.g., you may wish to record severity and impact of dysphasia separately from overall stroke. You can record a second disorder code to indicate an accompanying disorder, so you will know there is a co-existing problem that could have influenced the final outcome (e.g., challenging behaviour and dyspraxia). [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.29]
Using an ICD code will help if you want to compare your data with other services as it will ensure that you are comparing like with like and for you to report to managers and funders who may be interested in particular care pathways or client groups. You should use the ICD code to reflect the medical condition/diagnosis (codes for all aetiologies can be accessed online). The code associated with the reason for referral can be entered as the first code (1) (see page 21 for an example of the data entry form). A co-existing condition (to indicate, for example, if someone with a learning difficulty may have a fracture or someone with Parkinson’s disease might have a stroke) is entered by coding the accompanying aetiology as ICD second code (2). If there are multiple aetiologies, use the ICD code to indicate their presence. Individuals with more than one aetiology will often require intervention over a longer duration and possibly more frequently. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.29]
The TOM will show the deterioration in the impairment dimension. However, interventions may help the individual to sustain activity and participation for a time. Counselling may help support the individual emotionally and can be reflected in the wellbeing dimension. Rating on the TOM may help you to identify how long an individual can sustain their activity and quality of life while the disease progresses. A palliative care scale is now available as one of the adapted scales. Some services have found it helpful to record the ‘direction of care/care pathway’ (improve / sustain / manage decline), so that data can be filtered by these different objectives. You may wish to request this as an optional field in your data collection tool. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, pp.29-30]
You need to decide why you are seeing the individual. If the individual is clinically depressed, then you would record that under aetiology, and then rate the impairment that corresponds to their condition, for example anxiety. If the individual is low in spirit (but has not been identified as clinically depressed or having a mental health condition), then rate the degree of emotional disturbance in the wellbeing dimension. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.30]
Patients/clients can vary in their capability to perform a task and their ability to sustain that performance. You need to make a judgement on the level of performance that the individual can achieve and sustain for most of the time. Rate the prevalent performance. For example, if an activity is observed very occasionally or only first thing in the morning, that shows capability, but you need to rate the overall performance. The aim of your therapy may be to increase the amount of time of the behaviour the person is capable of the behaviour and if this is achieved then the improved consistency of the performance can be reflected at the next review. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.30]
You don’t reflect what the client is capable of but what they are doing ? not what they can do but what they do do! Often the aim of therapy is to reduce variability and getting the individual to do what is within their capability more consistently ? if this is achieved then the TOM would reflect this. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.30]
If your notes are sufficiently detailed for you to retrospectively record the TOM rating at the beginning of treatment then you can do this. The alternative is to start recording the TOM with new referrals. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.30]
If the individual does not complete their therapy, you should complete the final rating reflecting how they presented the last time that you worked with them and use the appropriate discharge code. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.30]
If the person dies during an active episode of care and if the therapist feels they know the patient sufficiently well to rate the person based on the last interaction then rate reflecting that situation. However, if not then leave as NA ? Not assessed. Do not forget to note the reason for discharge was death. You can use reasons for discharge as a filter when doing your data analysis. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.31]
Yes, but to help consistent analysis of the data it is best to indicate a ‘new episode of care’ or intermediate score to indicate that this was not the beginning of treatment. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.31]
Yes, if they are trained and reliable in using the TOM . They need to know which adapted scale was used initially. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.31]
Inter-rater reliability checks should be an ongoing process, to ensure everyone continues to use the TOM accurately and consistently and their scoring has not drifted. The TOMs User Guide (2019) recommends practising every 2-3 months, and suggests that team meetings could provide a good opportunity for this (see page 14). [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.31]
The initial TOM rating should be ascribed to an individual once all of the relevant information has been gathered about the individual’s presentation and how they are at that time. That is, the scores should reflect how the individual presents prior to speech and language therapy intervention. Thus, if the individual is not taking anything orally, the activity score would be zero. The level of impairment would be scored once the assessment has been completed (e.g., gathering information from the MDT, cranial nerve examination and trials on normal fluids and diet) and the severity of the dysphagia has been determined. The participation, wellbeing and carer wellbeing would also be scored as appropriate at the time of first assessment. If you commence therapy and/or provide recommendations during the same session, you may wish to do a second TOM rating (e.g., interim rating), reflecting how the individual presents following speech and language therapy assessment/involvement (e.g., if the individual is no longer nil by mouth, the activity score will change). [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.31]
The third edition of ‘Therapy Outcome Measures for Rehabilitation Professionals’ (Enderby & John, 2015) details on page 102 that it is necessary to consider and score the activity, participation and wellbeing without AAC and with AAC. This has not been found to be practical and it is now recommended that clients should be rated in the same way as on other adapted scales, i.e., as they present at a particular time point: initial, intermediate (if required) and at end of episode of care or discharge. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.31]
Please find an adaptation of the TOM specifically for this purpose. You need to make a rating about how the person is managing when referred and subsequently to reflect the difference in ability when their aid/equipment is being used. It is desirable to undertake another rating when the aid/equipment has been in use for some time to reflect whether it has made a difference to the client’s independence, participation and wellbeing. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.32]
It would not be appropriate to score wellbeing in this situation. Record this as not assessed (N.A). [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.32]
The TOM approach requires you to rate the infant/child/person as compared to another without the condition but of the same age, gender and culture. It is not uncommon for most infants with syndromes or health conditions to rate quite high initially as, of course, they are being compared with infants who are totally dependent at that age and their differences/difficulties are not exposed until later in their development. Of course, this can give the appearance when reviewing data that the child is getting worse over time, but this trajectory will be the same as other children with the same condition. That is why it is useful to collect data identifying the underlying condition (ICD), e.g., Down syndrome. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.32]
Therapy assistants/technical instructors who have received TOM training and are familiar with the principles and scales of the TOM, having rated patients/clients regularly and established good agreement/reliability may use the TOM independently. It is advised that reliability checks are undertaken regularly (approximately 2-3 per month with assistants) and that colleagues are aware of who within the service to approach with any queries or concerns when using the TOMs. Studies have shown that some therapy assistants/technical instructors can experience particular difficulty differentiating between the domains of ‘impairment’ and ‘activity’, and it is therefore suggested that it is helpful to focus on this during local training sessions and ongoing inter-rater reliability checks a little more regularly with them to assist with improving familiarity with using the domains. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.32]
If transferring within your service, you should provide an intermediate rating ‘I’ reflecting the situation before you hand over to the other clinician. However, if the client is being transferred to another service you will need to do a final rating ‘F’ and choose the discharge code of ‘transferred’ which indicates that the therapy was not complete. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.32]
If you need to change the focus of your intervention because of this new information then you will need to open a new episode of care using the adapted scale that is most appropriate. You will need to change the medical diagnostic coding /aetiology on your data collection form. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.33]
If you do not have sufficient information or it would be inappropriate to reflect participation or wellbeing due to particular circumstances then do not guess! Complete data collection by using NA – not assessed. Complete this when it is appropriate for you to do so, i.e., you have sufficient information/wishing to provide support or treatment for this domain. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.33]
Yes, you should be able to do this if you are able to gather the information assisting you to make decisions for the different domains. You can ask questions, and discuss with the client, supported by their carer if necessary; you can modify assessments for remote use; you can observe behaviour/responses and attempts at therapy. However, there are some circumstances where this is not advisable, including: when it is not possible to speak with and/or interact with the individual directly, and all information is provided by a relative/carer; or when the impairment is more difficult to accurately evaluate remotely, e.g., speech sounds, if the remote mode is of poor sound quality or difficulty in observing walking ability/dexterity due to technical limitations. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.33]
Certified TOMs trainers can provide remote training sessions for staff within their own trust/organization as per the trainer contract. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.33]
Yes, the adapted scales assist consistency/reliability when rating but be sure to record which scale is being used. Some adapted scales have been renamed due to changes in knowledge/research, etc. For example, one adapted scale was originally entitled ‘Child Language Impairment’ but was renamed to ‘Developmental Language Disorder’ to align with changes in the use of terminology. However, it is appropriate to use this scale with any children with language difficulties, including language disorders associated with other biomedical conditions. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.33]
In many cases (such as an amputation/laryngectomy) it is impossible to achieve a score of 5 indicating that the person has no impairment, i.e., that they had mysteriously grown back a limb or larynx! However, it is important that the top of the scale is still maintained even if no one with a particular impairment is able to achieve it. The TOM is an ordinal scale which provides descriptive qualities with an intrinsic order. It is important for statistical analysis that the bottom and top of the scale are identified. This helps with classification and comparisons. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.34]
If you would like to put the text of the adapted scale on your computer system you would need to get a licence from the copyright holder, i.e., J&R Press. If you only want to collect the scores and identify the core scale/adapted scale with its name and number, then you do not need this copyright agreement. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.34]
If a client is receiving care from a group of different professionals, it is useful to discuss a TOM rating together. This facilitates coordinated and interprofessional working but we would suggest that this should only be undertaken when there is the opportunity of discussing and rating the client with colleagues. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.34]
There are a range of different EPRs and options for recording TOM scores within these (e.g., forms, templates, questionnaires). It should be possible to enable most systems to record TOM data, but you may need support from IT or clinical systems to set this up. If you are using a system enabled with SNOMED CT, there are codes which correspond to each domain of the TOM. For more information about this, visit https://www.rcslt-root.org/Content/TOMs If you are a speech and language service wanting to record data in a suitable format for importing into the RCSLT Online Outcome Tool (ROOT), it is advisable to contact the team for advice on root@rcslt.org. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.34]
If services wish to build the full descriptors that relate to each TOM rating into their EPR (rather than simply record the scores, as per the previous question), this is possible but a licence agreement will be required with J&R Press. [Source: Enderby P, John A. Therapy outcome measure handbook: theory, user guide and scales. Guildford: J&R Press Ltd, 2025, p.34]
It is generally accepted that when using a PROM it is best to first ask the individual to rate their situation as they see it at the present moment without referral to their previous result but they can, if they wish, change their initial scores following reviewing their previous record. Please be aware that it is not possible to record the TOM-PROM on the ROOT. For more information about the TOM-PROM, please refer to page 350 of the TOM Handbook (2025).

ROOT

As the data is anonymised, unless any local polices indicate otherwise, it is not necessary to gain consent/permission. However, it is best practice to inform individuals and/or their families about how their data is used. If you already have a fair processing notice, or some other information provided to individuals about how their information is used, it would be worth considering making mention of the ROOT. You can find some template patient information leaflets on our resources pages or contact root@rcslt.org for more information.
The identifier can be any combination or letters and/or numbers. There is no requirement for it to contain both.
The ROOT collects information about individuals using an identifier, which needs to be unique, but not reveal the patient’s ‘real world identity’. The ROOT does not generate the identifier: this is created and managed by the service/organisation submitting the data. There are no specific ‘rules’ for what can or cannot be used, this is at the discretion of each service/organisation. It is likely that individuals responsible for information governance in the organisation will be involved in the decision. For more information, please consult the 'ROOT Information Governance Pack' and 'Guidance on unique patient identifiers', which can be found on the ROOT Resources pages.
Complete an end of episode rating but record as 'not assessed' for all the domains and choose the relevant end of episode/discharge code. It is advisable to do this, rather than delete the patient. They won’t appear in reports showing change of TOMS score but will appear in other admin reports where they could be useful. In some cases it will also be possible that the patient attends for further input (see answers to related questions).
When you record an end of episode/discharge code for a patient, they remain in the system, just as before. If they receive further input either immediately or at some time in the future, there is no action to ‘re-refer’ or ‘re-instate’ them you can simply add a further episode of care.
It is best practice to maintain the same unique patient identifier, rather than assign the patient a new one. If your service uses an existing number as the patient identifier like a case record number then this should be straightforward but if you have another method for generating identifiers then you may need to develop a system for checking if patients already have an identifier on ROOT. It is possible to search for patients by their identifier within ROOT by going to 'Patients' and then 'Patient Search'.
Patients should only be deleted if they have been added in error. See answer above re recommended action where patients do not complete an episode of care. If you have accidentally deleted a patient, your local admin can reinstate them by going to the Admin menu and choosing ‘Patients’ then ‘Removed’ and selecting ‘Reinstate’.
To remove a duplicate copy of the patient, firstly, use the ‘Patient Search’ to locate the patient using the local ID allocated to them. On the ‘Patient Details’ screen, select the ‘Remove Patient’ and provide the reason for doing so. Should you wish to allocate more than one local identifier to the patient, this is possible.
You can select two scales for an episode of care but must make one of these the primary scale. If both of these scales relate to communication, 'impairment' is rated on both scales but just one rating is required for other domains (using descriptors from primary scale). If a dysphagia scale and communication scale are selected, the ROOT will also require two separate ratings for Activity. (See below re having multiple episodes of care, but this should be an exception).
Yes, if they both have user access and both scales have been selected for the client. It would be good practice and is required that the therapists discuss and agree the single participation and wellbeing scores.
Please see FAQ in TOM section re new diagnosis/condition. Because the focus of the intervention needs to change it is not possible to add to the episode of care. In this situation the best option is to close the episode of care and open a new one with two scales.
Yes, it is possible to do this. Usually, it will not be necessary to have more than one episode of care open/active on the ROOT. An episode of care can have a primary and secondary scale and if there is a change to the focus of intervention, it is best practice to close the current episode of care before starting a new one. However, it is recognised that there are situations where multiple episodes of care are necessary (e.g. two SLTs working with the individual on separate, unrelated therapy goals). Please be aware that the two episodes of care will need to have different primary TOMs scales.
The International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) is a classification system of clinical terms developed by the World Health Organization (WHO). ICD-10 is the 10th revision of the ICD. It contains codes for diseases, signs and symptoms, abnormal findings, complaints, social circumstances, and external causes of injury or diseases. More information about this coding and classification system is available at: http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/en/ You will also find a 'frequently used ICD-10 codes' document on the ROOT Resources pages.
The ROOT still uses ICD10 codes, as there has been no formal announcement about decisions to adopt ICD-11 anywhere in the UK. In future, we plan to move over to SNOMED CT, as all parts of the UK have made commitments to adopt this terminology system. Please be reassured that there will be a long transition period and we will give everyone plenty of notice of any changes. You can read more on the RCSLT website https://www.rcslt.org/members/delivering-quality-services/clinical-terminology-classification-systems-guidance/
Yes, the ROOT can be used to report data on service users with progressive conditions separately. Some services have also found it helpful to record the ‘direction of care/care pathway’ (improve / sustain / manage decline), so that when analysing data they can filter by these different objectives. This is an optional field, which you can request is activated for your service by contacting root@rcslt.org
An episode of care needs to have scores at two time points (i.e. at both the start and end of the episode, or a start score and at least one interim score) for impairment and activity domains for the episode to show up in the reports. (So, if a score is missing, recorded as ‘not assessed’, or saved as a draft the episode will not be included in the report). If data is complete for impairment and activity but other scores are missing from other domains, the episode will appear in the reports but change over time will only be calculated for the domains where there are scores at both time points. This is why most of the reports that look at change in individual domains display the number of episodes in each domain and these numbers may not be consistent across the domains.
After you have imported a file, it may take a few minutes for the data to be processed. You will receive an email once this is complete. It will be possible to run reports on the newly uploaded data five minutes after receiving the confirmation email.
Each report provides the option to display your data along with that collected by all of the SLT services using the ROOT. If you opt to compare with other services, the data returned will match the parameters selected when you applied filters to the report. For example, if you applied parameters to return results for individuals aged 40-49 year with cognitive communication disorder and brain injury, the report would return this information from your service and all the other services who have submitted data within these parameters. If you choose to compare with other services but do not apply any filters, the reports will only include episodes from the dataset that have the same primary TOMs scale as the scales used by your service.
The national reports do not identify any of the individual services. It is not possible for a person using the ROOT at one organisation to run reports on any other organisation's data. They will only see a comparison between their data and that in the rest of the ROOT database - it does not show comparisons with other specific organisations.
The ROOT includes all published adapted TOM scales relevant to speech and language therapists, although some functionality is not yet available for scales with non-standard formats. ‘Accompanying scales’ (including the TOM-PROM), developed to provide additional information alongside the TOM scales, are not currently available on ROOT, because they have not been through the same reliability checks. Please see the ROOT resources pages for a list of all the published scales and their status on ROOT and contact us if you have any questions or feedback. If you are working on developing/adapting a TOM scale for a particular client group or service, please contact Professor Enderby directly.
ROOT - Developed by the Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists, in partnership with Different Class
© Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists