Ben Mortenson: Associate Professor at Department of Occupational Science & Occupational Therapy, UBC Faculty of Medicine

Associate Professor

Faculty of Medicine

Research Classification

Occupational therapy

Rehabilitation medicine

Research Interests

Accessibility

Assistive technology

Caregiving

Mobility

Outcome measures

Quality of Life and Aging

rehabilitation

Robotics

Social Aspects of Aging

Social participation

Spinal cord injury

Relevant Degree Programs

View all programs

Affiliations to Research Centres, Institutes & Clusters

James Hogg Research Centre

Open All

Research Methodology

Mixed-methods research

Qualitative Research

Randomized Control Trials

survey research

Ethnography

Wheelchair skills mobility assessment lab

Recruitment

Looking to recruit:

Master's students

Doctoral students

Desired start dates: Any time / year round

Potential research project areas:

My research focuses on four overlapping areas: assistive technology, social participation, caregiving and outcome measurement. My work is centered on four main populations: assistive technology users, informal and formal caregivers, individuals with spinal cord injury and residents in long-term care.

Other options:

I support public scholarship, e.g. through the Public Scholars Initiative, and am available to supervise students and Postdocs interested in collaborating with external partners as part of their research.

I support experiential learning experiences, such as internships and work placements, for my graduate students and Postdocs.

Complete these steps before you reach out to a faculty member!

Check requirements

Familiarize yourself with program requirements. You want to learn as much as possible from the information available to you before you reach out to a faculty member. Be sure to visit the graduate degree program listing and program-specific websites.
Check whether the program requires you to seek commitment from a supervisor prior to submitting an application. For some programs this is an essential step while others match successful applicants with faculty members within the first year of study. This is either indicated in the program profile under "Admission Information & Requirements" - "Prepare Application" - "Supervision" or on the program website.

Focus your search

Identify specific faculty members who are conducting research in your specific area of interest.
Establish that your research interests align with the faculty member’s research interests.
- Read up on the faculty members in the program and the research being conducted in the department.
- Familiarize yourself with their work, read their recent publications and past theses/dissertations that they supervised. Be certain that their research is indeed what you are hoping to study.

Make a good impression

Compose an error-free and grammatically correct email addressed to your specifically targeted faculty member, and remember to use their correct titles.
- Do not send non-specific, mass emails to everyone in the department hoping for a match.
- Address the faculty members by name. Your contact should be genuine rather than generic.
Include a brief outline of your academic background, why you are interested in working with the faculty member, and what experience you could bring to the department. The supervision enquiry form guides you with targeted questions. Ensure to craft compelling answers to these questions.
Highlight your achievements and why you are a top student. Faculty members receive dozens of requests from prospective students and you may have less than 30 seconds to pique someone’s interest.
Demonstrate that you are familiar with their research:
- Convey the specific ways you are a good fit for the program.
- Convey the specific ways the program/lab/faculty member is a good fit for the research you are interested in/already conducting.
Be enthusiastic, but don’t overdo it.

Attend an information session

G+PS regularly provides virtual sessions that focus on admission requirements and procedures and tips how to improve your application.

Supervision Enquiry

If you have reviewed some of this faculty member's publications, understand their research interests and have reviewed the admission requirements, you may .

Graduate Student Supervision

Doctoral Student Supervision (Jan 2008 - May 2021)

Towards a conceptual framework of navigation for people who use wheeled mobility devices in the community (2021)

No abstract available.

Peer mentoring in residential care: a mixed-methods study (2019)

A significant number of individuals living in residential care experience loneliness and depression. People engaged in peer mentoring draw benefits from the social and emotional connection; however, this approach is rare within these settings. The objectives of this study were to develop a new model of social citizenship based on peer mentoring, describe the development of a novel peer mentoring program; and collect feasibility data associated with its implementation (e.g., assessment of recruitment and sample; outcome measures and data collection; retention, program adherence and acceptability; and residents’ responses). The Peers Engaging and Empowering their Peers model, which has its foundations in social citizenship, provided the basis for a peer mentoring program in which community volunteers (community mentors) and resident volunteers (resident mentors) formed a supportive team and provided visits and guidance to other residents that were lonely or socially isolated (mentees). For the mixed-methods feasibility study, I enrolled community mentors (n = 65), resident mentors (n = 48) staff facilitators (n = 24) and mentees (n = 74) in 10 sites. Among resident mentors remaining at six months (n = 28), a significant reduction in loneliness scores (p = .014; d = .23) and depression scores (p = .048; d = .30) were noted. Sense of belonging, purpose in life and social identity were unchanged. In-depth interviews with a sample of resident mentors (n = 8) revealed positive perceptions of the program. Most of the feasibility objectives were met; however, low retention rates among resident mentors were noted as well as time and resource challenges. At six months, among the mentees from whom data could be obtained (n = 43), I found a significant reduction in loneliness (p = 0.02; d = .76) and depression (p = 0.02; d = .76), and a 60% increase in the number of monthly programs attended (p = 0.01; d = .37). Interviews with mentees (n = 32) indicated perceptions of the program were also positive. The study findings reveal a potential role that mentorship can play in enhancing social citizenship and lay the groundwork for future research.

View record

Master's Student Supervision (2010 - 2020)

A mixed-methods study comparing skill performance between indoor and outdoor environments among experienced scooter users (2020)

Background: The Wheelchair Skills Test (WST) has been validated to assess scooter users’ skill performance and mobility confidence. Traditionally, the WST has been performed using a standardized indoor course; however, it has been suggested that an outdoor community-based setting may be a suitable alternative. However, no previous research has compared scooter skill performance in an indoor versus outdoor environment. Objectives: 1) To explore participants’ experiences with scooter use, 2) to determine the distribution of WST scores and how scores compare between indoor and outdoor environments, 3) to determine correlations between the indoor lab-based WST scores, the outdoor community-based WST scores, and the WST-Q scores, and explore participants’ perspectives on the representativeness of the WST, testing preferences, and suggestions for improvement, and 4) to determine the practicality of performing the WST in an outdoor community-based setting.. Methods: For this mixed-methods study, 20 scooter users who have used their devices for ≥ 3 months were recruited. Each participant was randomized to complete the WST twice – once in their community and once indoors within a two-week period. While testing in the community, detailed observations were made of the setting and the 28 representative skills on the WST (e.g., curbs, hills). Semi-structured interviews were conducted after completion of the WST in both environments. Results: Indoor and outdoor scores were not strongly correlated (r= 0.306, p=0.190) and demonstrated wide limits of agreement. The outdoor WST scores were weakly correlated with subjective capacity, confidence, performance, and mobility; however, this may have been related to a low variation in scores. When searching for WST obstacles in the community, the majority were easily found. . Whereas most participants preferred performing the WST in their community due to convenience and familiarity, they also perceived the indoor course as reflective of their community setting. Conclusion: These findings suggest that skills testing in the community is feasible; however, skills testing in indoor and outdoor settings are not comparable. Community-based testing may provide a better reflection of day to day performance of experienced users, but may not reflect user’s capacity in novel environments.

View record

Understanding health literacy and eHealth literacy among individuals with spinal cord injury: a mixed-methods study (2020)

Introduction: With recent advancements in internet technologies, the field of eHealth has grown as a medium for facilitating self-care. As eHealth transitions into becoming the new standard for providing healthcare in the twenty-first century, it is important to make sure that no one gets left behind. This purpose of this research was to (1) evaluate eHealth literacy levels among individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI), (2) find predictors of eHealth literacy, (3) explore how they seek health information, (4) learn about their experiences with internet-based health resources, and (5) identify barriers and facilitators to their engagement with eHealth technologies.Methods: This research used a mixed-methods design. A total of 30 community-dwelling individuals with SCI were recruited. Quantitative survey data were collected on participants’ eHealth literacy, general health literacy, and demographic data. Qualitative interviews were conducted with a subset of study participants (n=20). Results: The average age of participants was 46 years old, and 15 participants were male and 15 were female. A total of 23 participants experienced traumatic SCI and 7 participants experienced non-traumatic SCI. Participants demonstrated moderate levels of eHealth literacy (30.7 out of 40) and general health literacy (18 out of 20). Significant, positive correlations were found between general health literacy and demographic factors, including age, income, and education. Employment status prior to SCI (employed vs not employed) was found to be a significant predictor of eHealth literacy. Participants’ living arrangement (alone vs not alone) was found to be a significant predictor of general health literacy. Three overarching themes emerged from a qualitative analysis of participants’ experiences with eHealth technologies, which include eHealth technologies’ role in (1) bridging a trust gap with users, (2) being accessible to individuals with SCI, and (3) serving as a facilitator for social engagement. Conclusion: This study demonstrated the diverse range of eHealth literacy levels in SCI populations and how users experience eHealth technologies. Long term, these findings may serve a tool to inform health technology developers and researchers on how to provide more accessible and easy-to-use eHealth technologies for individuals with SCI.

View record

A peer mentorship to enhance active lifestyle and community integration in people with Spinal Cord Injury: I-wheel (2019)

Wheelchair maintenance is an important factor in wheelchair mobility. Currently, there is no standardized training resource available to teach wheelchair users about the maintenance or set-up of their manual wheelchairs. Purpose: The purpose of this feasibility research was to assess the feasibility of conducting an experimental study to evaluate the wheelchair maintenance training program. Method: The research program had two main phases. Phase 1 included the development of learning materials, evaluation forms and tests. We performed reliability tests on the 3-cone test and wheelchair maintenance knowledge test and report them in chapter two and three. Phase 2 entailed a feasibility study. In this study, we conducted a wheelchair maintenance workshop to train the mentors (n=5) and then assigned each mentor three mentees (n =15). Each mentor conducted a one-on-one peer-session with each mentee and each mentee completed assigned tests and questionnaires during three assessment visits (baseline, and 2 and 4 weeks after their peer session). Feasibility outcomes were evaluated, and all mentees completed an exit survey at the end of the wheelchair maintenance training program. Results: The 3-cone test and the wheelchair maintenance knowledge test are reliable (ICC >0.9) to use in clinical research. In feasibility study for wheelchair maintenance training, the process outcome (recruitment rate: mentor 71%, mentee 25%), resource outcome (retention rate (>90%), adherence (>90%), fidelity (>80%), completion rate (>90%) and training satisfaction (>90%) and preliminary evaluation outcomes were achieved. Scheduling (management outcome) was challenging and we were not able to meet the goal projected for this outcome, however we were able to complete all the sessions. Conclusion: The 3-cone test and the wheelchair maintenance knowledge test appear to be useful and reliable to be used in the clinical setting. Summary and descriptive results from the feasibility study were sufficient to justify conducting a subsequent randomized controlled trial. We hope to replicate the findings of wheelchair maintenance training by demonstrating the change in mechanical efficacy of wheelchair and the increased knowledge about wheelchair maintenance in the future. This evidence could then be used to support changes in teaching and knowledge improvement in wheelchair maintenance.

View record