The question of how an issue gains importance on a political agenda is an important one.
Next, it allowed the Citizen to rate his elected leader on how effectively he has tackled issues of high importance on a scale of one to 10.
The attributes were rated in terms of importance on a scale from 1 (least important) to 10 (most important) from the perspective of a patient with severe aplastic anemia who is considering treatment/management options.
As with the pilot nominal group, the group individually ranked each statement in order of importance on a 5-point scale (1 very important, 2 important, 3 no opinion, 4 not important, 5 not at all important).
36 The pilot nominal group individually ranked each statement in order of importance on a 5-point scale (1 very important, 2 important, 3 no opinion, 4 not important, 5 not at all important).
Initial expert score was made by a panel consisting of 18 members (specialists in urology, nursing, psychology, statistics, and public health and BPH patient representatives) according to the importance on a scale of 1 5 (1 = least important and 5 = most important).
Each item evaluates the level of importance on a 4-point scale, ranging from 'Not important' (1), 'Somewhat important' (2), 'Important' (3), to 'Extremely important' (4).
Participants were asked to adjust a slider to reflect a level of importance on a continuum between 0 (not at all important) and 100 (extremely important).
In addition people were asked to indicate whether performing paid work was of personal importance on a 7-point scale (1 = not important at all to 7 = extremely important).
†Self-ratings of importance on a four-point scale: from 1 = not important to 4 = essential.
‡Self-ratings of importance on a three-point scale: from 1 = not important to 3 = very important.
