The major limitation of these studies using subjectively based measures as a key risk factor is the inconsistent terms used to describe ground hardness.
However, further research would be necessary to validate these test based measures as a proxy for non-cognitive skills.
A number of these are ecologic studies using geographical area based measures as SES indicators (comparing richer with poorer areas).
Utility values are measured on a 1 to 0 (full health- dead) scale and are usually obtained using existing off-the-shelf preference based measures, such as the EQ-5D [ 3], SF-6D [ 4] or HUI [ 5] instruments.
The comparisons that we can make are also limited by the amount of data that we could collect, and also it would be interesting to collect data using a longer generic measures of HRQL such as the SF-12 [ 21, 22], or other preference based measures such as the SF-6D [ 23].
Results from other preference based measures, such as the 15D and Health Utilities Index suggests a difference of 0.03 is considered the minimum clinically important difference for sample size calculations.
However, EQ-5D based measures performed as well and are generally simpler to use.
In particular, it solves some of the key problems with subjective paper based measures such as SWAT and ISA, including the need to interrupt the task at hand in order to collect workload ratings.
Individual or household based socioeconomic measures such as these were stronger predictors of teenage pregnancy than community based measures such as SEIFA [ 29].
Traditionally, need has been estimated by using professionally based measures, known as normative need.
For strongly conserved rigid gap motifs, presented in Table 6, and as already verified with contiguous motifs, support and support-based measures as the IG, LogOdd and Z-Score are good enough to discriminate the target motifs.
