The Home Office published a report classifying a procedure's severity as mild, moderate, substantial and unclassified.
Local councils are free to set their own thresholds within a national framework of low, moderate, substantial and critical needs definitions.
There are four thresholds - low, moderate, substantial and critical.
Values of (kappa =0), (0.41< kappa <0.60), (0.61< kappa < 0.80) and (kappa =1) represent no, moderate, substantial and perfect agreement, respectively [48, 49].
It is also up to councils to decide, depending on their finances, which of the four thresholds - low, moderate, substantial and critical - they want to set when determining whether to fund care.
Landis and Koch's benchmarks [17] were used to evaluate simple and weighted k statistics in which k in the ranges of <0.00, 0.00 0.20, 0.21 0.40, 0.41 0.60, 0.61 0.80, 0.81 1.00, respectively, correspond to poor, slight, fair, moderate, substantial, and almost perfect agreement.
There were two cases where the agreement level was higher with visualization: Monopoly (from moderate to substantial) and Jackut (from substantial to almost perfect).
The kappa coefficients of the inter- and intra-observer agreement were classified according to the Landis and Koch classification: κ = 0.00 'Poor', 0 0.20 'Slight', 0.21 0.40 'Fair', 0.41 0.60 'Moderate', 0.61 0.80 'Substantial', and 0.81 1.00 'Near 'perfect' [12].
A concordance correlation coefficient of <0.90 is considered poor, 0.90 0.95 moderate, 0.95 0.99 substantial, and >0.99 almost perfect [ 30].
κ statistics were calculated and assessed based on Landis and Koch (19): <0.20, poor; 0.21 0.40, fair; 0.41 0.60, moderate; 0.61 0.80, substantial; and 0.81 1.00, almost perfect strength of agreement.
The results were calculated as kappa values, and the outcome was interpreted as: 0-0.2 poor, 0.2-0.4 0.2-0.4.4-0.6 moderate, 0.6-0.8 substantial, and 0.8-1.0 almost perfair agreement [ 17, 18].
