This problem concerns the issues of a cut-off score for poorer QOL or the identification of subjects "at risk status for impaired QOL" [ 30], and the clinical significance of the scores [ 50, 51].
This can be illustrated as follows: the direction of the HAEMO-QOL scales (higher score for poorer HRQoL) is arbitrary and might as well have been reversed so that a higher score would correspond to a better HRQoL (which is the case for most other HRQoL instruments).
On average cluster analysis/driving performance and neuropsychological tests show comparatively low scores for poor drivers (group 2).
4) On average cluster analysis/driving performance and neuropsychological tests show comparatively low scores for poor drivers (group 2). .
If the data then shows that it is no more difficult, systemically, to raise scores for students coming from intense concentrations of extreme poverty than it is to increase test scores for poor kids in selective schools, we practitioners will stand corrected.
Scores for poor sleep quality were associated with premenstrual dysphoria, occupational injury, illness, and medication use [ 12].
MAS categorised adolescents into material affluence groups (MAS scores for the poorest, poor, average, affluent and most affluent were−1.679, −0.355, 0.354, 0.725 and 1.022 from the first principal component quintile respectively), it has adequate internal coherence (α = 0.622) and moderately correlates with parental SES (r = 0.39, p < 0.001).
Another example of action taken is when musculoskeletal complaints are the main health problem in workers scoring <6 for poor work ability on the 11-point scale of the Finnish WAI [ 24]; sometimes only the first item of the WAI is used and action can be taken based on that score [ 25].
Using the overall score allowed compensation for poor conditions in one category, by better scores in another one, for example a lower score in the "locomotion" category could be compensated for by a better score in the "environment" category.
Leg scores ranged from 1 to 5, the optimum level being 3. Data were then transformed into a desirability scale, by using the absolute value of the original scores after subtracting three scores (score 3 becomes 0 for optimum leg score, score 2 and 4 become 1 for moderate leg score, and score 1 and 5 become 2 for poor leg score).
