Sentence examples for validity of the worst from inspiring English sources

Results of concept elicitation interviews and cognitive debriefing of the BFI fatigue severity subscale support the development and content validity of the Worst Fatigue – Numeric Rating Scale to assess that aspect of fatigue.

Results of this study strongly supported content validity for the "worst pain item," whereas the results did not support content validity for the "average pain" item or the MPQ PPI item.

Results strongly supported content validity for the "worst pain item" in this population.

This study was conducted to support the content validity of the BPI "worst pain" item for use in clinical trials of mesothelioma that may be seeking a label claim for pain improvement.

How does the validity of the best-worst scaling method compare to the willingness pay method?

Qualitative evidence from CRPC patients supports the content validity of the BPI-SF "Worst Pain' item and promotes use of this item for measuring pain severity in this population.

Although patients with mCRPC were not included during initial development of the BPI-SF or MPQ, Gater and colleagues evaluated the content validity of the BPI-SF "worst pain" and "average pain" items (both assessed on a 0 10 numeric rating scale) as well as the MPQ PPI (assessed on a 0 6 verbal rating scale) in cognitive debriefing interviews with 17 patients with mCRPC [[ 21]].

The evidence of the content validity of the BPI-sf and the "worst pain" item has not been established in patients with mesothelioma.

aGater and colleagues evaluated the content validity of the BPI-SF "average pain" and "worst pain" items (both assessed on a 0 10 numeric rating scale) in cognitive debriefing interviews with 17 patients with mCRPC [[ 21]].

Results support the relevance and ease of understanding of the "worst pain" item and provide support for its content validity in patients with pleural and peritoneal mesothelioma.

Further, the paper reveals implications of these uncertainties: (1) potential values embedded in the risk assessments, (2) lack of validity of quantified worst-case scenarios and their probabilities and impacts, (3) limited prospects of filling addressed knowledge gaps and (4) how risk assessments restrict the debate on what issues and uncertainties are considered relevant.