Suggestions(1)
Exact(4)
Finally, to determine how the Open-ended group compared to the Language groups on the untrained items, we compared the Shape Language group to the Open-ended group on elevation items, t 34), = 0.32, p = .75, d = 0.10, and the Elevation Language group to the Open-ended group on shape items, t 33) = 0.69, p = .50, d = 0.24.
To examine for possible generalization effects to untreated items, we compared accuracy on treated items with control nontreated items.
In order to consider whether differences among the surveys may apply more generally to other self-reported health-related items, we compared these results with trends in other variables.
In order to determine whether the two cohorts responded differently to survey items, we compared mean responses to the 35 matrix items at each of the three administrations of the survey (i.e. MS1 at beginning of AY2010 compared with MS2 at beginning of AY2010, etc).. Out of the 105 total comparisons, there were statistically significant differences in 28 group mean responses.
Similar(56)
To improve the practical use of the short forms (SFs) developed from the item bank, we compared the measurement precision of the 4- and 8-item SFs generated from a motor item bank composed of the FIM and the Minimum Data Set (MDS).
To detect the presence of differential item functioning (DIF), which occurs when different groups within the sample respond in a different manner to an individual item [ 34], we compared the different levels of the trait by gender.
To detect the presence of differential item functioning (DIF), which occurs when different groups within the sample respond in a different manner to an individual item [ 22], we compared different levels of the trait by type of cancer and gender and age (<65 vs. ≥ 65 years).
For those food subgroup items without similar classification, we compared the total quantities rather than any single subgroup item.
We compared item and scale agreements from the two block faces with chi-square for categorical items, and intra-class correlations (ICC) for the summary scale.
To examine face validity, we compared SRQ-20 items with ASCL items qualitatively, identifying parallel content and item differences.
To identify possible order effects we compared item means and scale means between the two versions.
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