Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(6)
Using observer estimates as the "gold standard", validity was good for the question on mobility (Cohen's weighted κ= 0.60, concordance 70.1%) and for the question on freedom to sit (Cohen's κ= 0.72, concordance 85.9%).
Standard validity and reliability analyses were performed.
To do so, we applied standard validity testing with a gold standard.
Concurrent validity rather that gold standard validity was investigated in this study.
Both the BASC and BRIEF include standard validity scales to identify problematic observations.
Criterion standard validity with the EQ-5D was poor and inversely correlated (r = −0.42) and with Physical and Mental Component of SF-12 it was fair and inversely correlated (r = −0.56 and r = −0.48), respectively.
Similar(54)
In the absence of a gold standard, the validity in our study was expressed in terms of construct validity, calculated with the Spearman's correlation coefficient.
Instead, what is needed is an effort to work out an adequate standard of validity, or what Habermas refers to as the quasi-transcendental principles of communicative reason.
I admit neither of these criteria meet the scientific standard for validity, but since I'm am just trying to figure things out, and have no stake in the outcome one way or the other, I have a comfortable faith in my observations.
Reporting of all standard criterion validity indexes.
This study utilized a prospective blinded concurrent reference standard related validity design.
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