No abstract available.
Reproducibility of Results*

The purpose of this study was to examine if Likert scales had been properly utilized in community nutrition research. A total of 527 research articles published in the 32 issues of Korean Journal of Community Nutrition from the volume 5, issue 1 in 2000 to the volume 10, issue 2 in 2005 were screened and 55 articles were found to have utilized one or more Likert scales for the studies. Therefore, 109 Likert scales used in the 55 studies were reviewed regarding the name, statement and response items, reliability and validity check, and analysis method. The scales were mostly referred as Likert scales (60%) or Likert-type scales (27%). Some scales were found to be referred as Likert scales although they were Likert-type scales when judged based on the information given in the respective articles. However some scales couldn't be judged for the rightness of the names because the information given for the scales in the articles was not enough. About 23% of the scales consisted of items less than 6 or more than 30, and therefore found to be inappropriate. The percentage of the scales listing all the statement items in the articles was only 25%. Most of the scales (85%) included 5 response items, and the rest included 4 (7%), 7 (6%), or 3 (2%). The percentages of the scales including appropriate center and end items were only 2% and 22%, respectively. Less than half of the scales (41%) were found to have been checked for reliability and only one scale was reported to have been checked for validity. In some scales (6%), the responses were scored improperly for analysis. The responses to the scales were frequently found to have been analyzed by parametric statistics such as mean, ANOVA, t-test, and Pearson's correlation, which might be a problem depending on the size and distribution of study samples. In conclusion, there is much room for improvement in the use of Likert scales in community nutrition research.
Reproducibility of Results ; Weights and Measures

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are known to provide the most reliable evidence on intervention. However, RCTs are often conducted and reported incompletely and inadequately, making readers and reviewers unable to judge the validity and reliability of the trials. In this article, we consider the statistical and methodological issues involved in reporting on RCTs, particularly in relation to the objectives, designs, and commencements of trials. This paper deals with the various issues that should be considered in presenting RCTs, and suggests checklists for reporting on them. We expect that these checklists will remind readers and reviewers to evaluate manuscripts systematically and comprehensively, making those manuscripts more transparent and reliable.
Checklist ; Methods ; Reproducibility of Results

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of the Second Korean Working Conditions Survey (KWCS), focusing on its validity and reliability. METHODS: The external validity was evaluated by the assessment of sampling procedures and the response rate, in order to investigate the representativeness of the sample. The content validity was evaluated by the assessment of the development of the questionnaire, and the consistency of questions for the selected construct. The test-retest method was used to evaluate the reliability by means of a phone call survey of 30% of the respondents, who were randomly selected. The respondents' satisfaction regarding the survey procedures and interview time were analyzed to evaluate the quality of survey data. RESULTS: The external validity was assured by an acceptable sampling procedure, rigid multi-stage stratified cluster random sampling. The content validity was also guaranteed by a reasonable procedure for the development of the questionnaire with a pretest. The internal consistency of the questions for work autonomy was maintained, with 0.738 of Cronbach's alpha. The response rate of 36% was lower than that of the European Working Conditions Survey (EWCS), with a contact rate of 66%, compared to 76% for the EWCS. The matching rates of the five retested questions were more than 98% reliable. CONCLUSION: The quality of the second KWCS was assured by the high external and content validity and reliability. The rigid sampling procedure and development of the questionnaire contributed to quality assurance. The high level of reliability may be guaranteed by the sophisticated field survey procedures and the development of a technical manual for interviewers. The technical strategies for a high response rate should be developed for future surveys.
Surveys and Questionnaires ; Reproducibility of Results*

PURPOSE: Since 2000, the Korea University Medical College has conducted Comprehensive Basic Medical Sciences Examination as a summative test. Summative assessment must be dependable in that it meets the highest standards of reliability and validity. The purpose of this study were to examine the validity and reliability of Comprehensive Basic Medical Sciences Examination and to improve the quality of the examination. METHODS: The subject of this study was the examination materials and scores of the test. We conducted exploratory factor analysis to testify validity. Cronbach alpha coefficient was used to examine the reliability. RESULTS: Only one factor was extracted from exploratory factor analysis. Its eigen value was 4.61 and it explained 65.93% of total variance. We could infer the extracted factor as an ability of basic medical sciences knowledge. The reliability coefficient of the test was ranged from 0.45 to 0.74. Of the total 335 item, overall acceptable items were 206(58.0%); the range of difficulty was 0.21~1.00 and discriminative indices were higher than 0.20. CONCLUSION: We confirmed the Comprehensive Basic Medical Sciences Examination in 2000 met the relative highest standards of reliability and validity. Item analysis could be of help to improve the quality of examination
Korea ; Psychometrics* ; Reproducibility of Results

This study is related to analysis the validity and reliability of double major data for admission in college of medicine yonsei university. The 69 applicants and 37 of those who had been admitted were sampled and then the GPAs of previous major, the interview scores and the GPAs of medical college were used as sources of analysis. This study is estiamted descriptive statistics, concurrent-related evidence of validity between GPAs previous college and interview scores, predictive-related evidence of validity of GPAs of previous college and interview scores, inter-scorer reliability of interview scores. The results of this study are like this: First, all of 69 students applied and 37(53.6%) applicants were admitted. Eleven students who were admitted graduated bio-chemical department of the college of science. The percentile rank of learning achievement of successful candidates show 64.5~98.2(1995), 43.6~86.6(1996), 22.8~96.9(1997). Second, the result of the estimation of the concurrence-related evidence of validity appear 0.729(1994), 0.673(1995), 0.562(1996), 0.876(1997). Therefore the candidates who got high GPAs also took high interview scores. Third, the predictive-related evidence of validity show insignificant. Forth, generalizability of inter-scorer reliability about intervew scores appear 0.972(1994), 0.983(1995). To improve the validity and relibility double major data, interview skills and educational programs has to be reoriented.
Humans ; Learning ; Reproducibility of Results*

No abstract available.
Child* ; Humans ; Reproducibility of Results*

No abstract available.
Humans ; Reproducibility of Results*

OBJECT: The Composite Scale by Smith et al. has been proposed as an improved measure of momingness-eveningness. This study attempted to endorse that a Korean translation of Composite Scale(KtCS) can be useful to differentiate people according to circadianrhythm types. METHOD: KtCS and Life Habit Questionnaire(LHQ) were administered to 561 university students. LHQ consisted of items questioning sleep habits on weekdays(bedtime, rising time and sleep length), the time of perceived peak alertness(mental and physical), time of perceived peak performance(mental, physical and academic), and quality of academic performance during the morning, afternoon and evening. Subjects were categorized on the basis of their KtCS scores into evening(I) types, intermediate(I) types, and morning(M) types. The cut-off points for these categories were set at the 10th and 90th percentiles. In addition 7 I-type and 7 M-type subjects were selected from the student population who had participated in the previous survey and then, oral temperature of each subject was taken every hour torn 08 : 00 to 22 : 00. To assess both the internal and the external measurement properties of KtCS, descriptive statistics, reliability and validity were examined. RESULTS: The distribution of KtCS scores was significantly, negatively skewed. The KtCS scores closest to the 10th and 90th percentiles were 26 and 41 respectively. The split-half reliability(. 85), test-retest reliability( .91), and internal consistency(Cronbach alpha, .82) were obtained above the expected. Inter-item correlations were all positive and ranged from .10-.59 with a mean of .25. Item-total correlations varied from .33 to .63 with a mean of .45. Common factor analyses confirmed three factors: preferred times of performance and going to bed, arising time, and morning alertness. The validity of KtCS was further demonstrated through strong relationships between the scale and external criteria.4 discernable difference in oral temperature between the M-type and the type across morning to evening provided additional evidence for validity of the scale. CONCLUSIONS: The results would suggest the possibility that KtCS can be employed as a tool for selection of I-type people or M-type people. It is as yet, however, uncertain that KtCS might be suitable to select people for night shiftwork because the subjects of this study are limited to university students. Therefore, future research among varying types of people are required to endorse this study.
Humans ; Reproducibility of Results

There is a growing interest in research on satisfaction with healthcare provider (HCP) and HCP- patient communication as a measure of healthcare quality of HCP’s communication competency. However, many communication assessments were not comprehensive measures and are not entirely accurate in measuring what is supposed to be measured. This study aimed at assessing the validity and reliability of a newly developed HCP-PC instrument in a Malaysian primary care setting. The HCP-PC instrument was developed using items adapted from existing instruments as well as self-developed items. A pilot study involving 277 clients of an outpatient clinic was conducted in HKL using the proposed instrument which was distributed immediately after face to face consultation. The content validity and Cronbach alpha reliability were assessed. Factor analysis constructed 3 components, exchanging information (EI), socioemotional behaviour (SB) and communication style (CS). All items loaded on the corresponding component with factor loading ≥0.6, suggesting that all items in the respective component are measuring the same direction. PCA of the final 30 items explain 61.98% of the total variance with 6.66%, 47.18% and 8.13% explained by EI, SB and CS respectively. Component-based reliability show strong internal consistency with Cronbach alpha, αEI= 0.92, αSB= 0.96 and αCS= 0.70. The pilot study supported the instrument validity and reliability after initial tests. However, further study needs to be done to confirm its construct validity to help establish a valid and reliable HCP-PC instrument for measuring patient satisfaction with HCP-PC that can be used in primary care setting.
Reproducibility of Results ; Health Personnel