Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(7)
The median item discrimination value was 0.32.
At both time points all response options were endorsed, and the mean and median item values were reasonably comparable.
The median item non-response rate was 3%, with lower rates for demographic information (<1%), 2% missing on drinking variables, and between 5-10% on counselling variables.
Data quality was assessed by mean, median, item response, missing values, floor and ceiling effects, internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha and average inter-item correlation), item-rest correlations.
As this parameter did not fit the normal distribution Shapiro-Wilks W == .910, p < .001; Fig. 2a), comparison of median item difficulty within each group was performed by means of the Mann–Whitney- U test.
We initially examined whether the inclusion of an image within the item stem altered the item difficulty using Mann Whitney U. The median item difficulty for images with purely textual stems was 0.77, while that for items within which an appropriate image was included was 0.80 (Fig. 3); this difference was not significant (0.77 vs. 0.80; p = 0.862, Mann–Whitney-U = 4818.5; Fig. 3).
Similar(53)
The median item-total score correlation was.41, and the overall item-total score correlations were statistically significant (p < .01).01
The homogeneity of item content for the SIQ/SIQ-JR was supported by good item-total correlations, with all correlations higher than 0.5 and median item-total correlations higher than 0.7 in the overall, male, and female samples.
There was one outlier, a patient who had severe cognitive problems, and when this individual's data was excluded the missing data reduced to mean 4.6 items, median 0 items.
Though the number of items administered to each simulee was the same across the two conditions, median CAT item usage was lower (Med=504) in the 2PL than in the 1PL (Med=586) condition.
However, assuming a median inter-item correlation of around 0.3, and that items are reasonably well separated, a sample size of 100 patients is sufficient for the proposed analysis.
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