Exact(3)
Scores from each activity are summed to give an overall indication of functional difficulty, where 0 indicates maximal difficulty and 80 indicates no difficulty.
It has a 5-point rating scale on all items in which "1" indicates no difficulty and "5" indicates extreme difficulty or inability to perform the activity.
Items are scored on a five-point Likert scale of 0 to 4, where 0 indicates no difficulty and 4 indicates extreme difficulty.
Similar(57)
Each component score ranges from 0 (indicating no difficulty) to 3 (indicating severe difficulty).
For each question the participant is asked to rate the magnitude of the disability from the previous 30 days, selecting to report either: None (indicating no difficulty), Mild, Moderate, Severe or Extreme/cannot.
The possible score for each item within a domain ranged from 1: unable to do to 5: able to do without any difficulty ¥ Proportion of consumers who scored 1 to 4 indicating any level of difficulty difficulty with domain items; § Proportion of consumers who scored 5, indicating no difficulty with domain items.
The FAAM is a set of eight (8) items that are each scored by the participant from 4 to 0, with a score of 4 indicating no difficulty with the functional task and 0 indicating that the participant is unable to perform the task.
The Mental Component Scale (MCS) also ranges from 0 100 with 100 indicating no difficulties or impairments in daily functioning due to psychological issues [ 16].
Responses to the two questions were combined to indicate no economic difficulties, occasional difficulties and frequent difficulties at baseline and follow-up.
Responses were assessed over the previous three months on a visual analogue scale with an anchor of zero reflecting greater limitations, difficulties and concerns and an anchor of 100 indicating no limitations, difficulties or concerns.
Women indicating having no difficulties were recoded as "No" before the statistical analysis, while those indicating it would be "a little bit difficult" or "really difficult" were regarded as respectively experiencing moderate or serious financial distress.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com