strength of agreement

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "strength of agreement" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used in contexts where you are discussing the level or degree to which individuals or groups concur on a particular issue or statement. Example: "In the survey results, we measured the strength of agreement among participants regarding the new policy changes."

✓ Grammatically correct

Science

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

For 15 persons whose pain was categorized in person by 2 investigators, strength of agreement was also substantial (κ=.66).

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

Furthermore, for both launch monitors, the strength of agreement for several parameters varied between clubs.

Measurement

Kappa value indicated a good strength of agreement.

Critical Ultrasound Journal

'I agree with the statement but aspects of religion change the strength of agreement.'.

Evolution: Education and Outreach

The primary outcome is the strength of agreement between bedside ultrasonography and capnography in confirming endotracheal tube location after intubation.

Critical Ultrasound Journal

The strength of agreement of kappa coefficients was guided by the boundaries suggested by Landis and Koch [16].

Critical Ultrasound Journal

The observed agreement rate was 0.81 and Kappa was 0.62, a good strength of agreement (previous unpublished data).

The Journal of Headache and Pain

The third model to be considered is the non-homogeneous agreement model which assumes a different strength of agreement for different reading categories.

EJNMMI Research

Using kappa statistics, we will use the values to determine the strength of agreement between bedside ultrasonography examination and waveform capnography as the standard of care.

Critical Ultrasound Journal

The observed agreement rate was 0.87 and the chance corrected agreement rate Kappa was 0.77, again a good strength of agreement [9].

The Journal of Headache and Pain

Table 2 Altman's kappa strength interpretation criteria Ќ Strength of agreement <0.20 Poor 0.21 0.40 Fair 0.41 0.60 Moderate 0.61 0.80 Good 0.81 1.00 Very good.

International Journal of Emergency Medicine

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When reporting statistical agreement, specify the measure used (e.g., Kappa, ICC) to ensure clarity and reproducibility. For example, "The strength of agreement was assessed using Cohen's Kappa."

Common error

Avoid using correlation coefficients as the sole indicator of agreement. While correlation measures the linear relationship between variables, it doesn't necessarily reflect the "strength of agreement" between raters or methods. Agreement statistics like Kappa or ICC are more appropriate for assessing concordance.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "strength of agreement" functions as a noun phrase, typically acting as the subject or object of a sentence. It denotes the degree to which different parties or methods are in accord, as evidenced by Ludwig examples measuring concordance in pain categorization or endotracheal tube location.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

Science

100%

Less common in

News & Media

0%

Formal & Business

0%

Encyclopedias

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, "strength of agreement" is a commonly used noun phrase primarily found in scientific and academic contexts. As Ludwig AI confirms, the phrase is grammatically correct and serves to quantify the degree of consistency or concordance between different methods or observers. It is crucial to specify the statistical measure used (e.g., Kappa, ICC) when reporting agreement, and to avoid confusing correlation with true agreement. While alternatives such as "level of consensus" or "degree of accord" can be used, "strength of agreement" remains a precise and widely accepted term in its field.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

level of agreement

Indicates where the different parts are aligned.

level of consensus

Focuses on the general agreement within a group, rather than the intensity of that agreement.

degree of consensus

Highlights how much agreement exists overall.

degree of accord

Highlights the extent to which parties are in harmony or agreement.

extent of concurrence

Emphasizes the alignment of opinions or judgments.

measure of alignment

Suggests a quantifiable aspect of how well different elements are aligned.

scope of unanimity

Refers to the breadth of agreement among all members involved.

level of consistency

Indicates the reliability and uniformity of agreement across different instances or raters.

degree of correspondence

Focuses on the similarity or equivalence between different sets of data or observations.

level of affirmation

Emphasizes the support or validation of a statement or idea.

FAQs

How is the "strength of agreement" typically measured?

The "strength of agreement" is commonly measured using statistical methods such as Cohen's Kappa for categorical data, and Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) for continuous data. These measures quantify the degree of concordance between different observers or methods.

What constitutes a 'good' "strength of agreement"?

The interpretation of what constitutes a 'good' "strength of agreement" depends on the context and the specific measure used. Generally, Kappa values above 0.75 are considered excellent, 0.60-0.75 good, 0.40-0.60 moderate, and below 0.40 poor. For ICC, values above 0.70 are often considered acceptable.

What are some alternatives to saying "strength of agreement"?

You can use alternatives like "level of consensus", "degree of accord", or "extent of concurrence" depending on the specific nuance you want to convey.

How does "strength of agreement" differ from "statistical significance"?

"Strength of agreement" refers to the degree of concordance between measurements or observers, while statistical significance indicates whether an observed effect is likely due to chance. A statistically significant result does not necessarily imply a strong "strength of agreement", and vice versa. They address different aspects of the data.