Exemplos de uso de Response scale em Inglês e suas traduções para o Português
{-}
-
Colloquial
-
Official
-
Medicine
-
Financial
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Computer
-
Official/political
For each of the 5 items, the response scale was'nothing','little','moderate' and'a lot.
Participants answered the 21 items using a 6-point response scale 0-5.
The response scale in the Swiss survey ranged from 1"certainly yes" to 5"definitely no.
The mean for 61 of the 68 items for the total sample was greater than 4.0 on a response scale of 1-5.
The response scale varies between 0”no” and 4”yes”, in addition, contemplating the intermediate value 2”sometimes”.
The stimulation levels that arrived to the subjects was measured with the response scale of the sound level meter.
Next, there are the instructions, the response scale, and its 22 items, 20 of which begin with“I am confident that I am able, by myself…”.
In this stage, the respondents reported understanding the items, anddenied difficulties for interpreting the response scale.
The design was altered and the numbering was removed from the response scale, this being considered not to be important for the respondents.
A 4-point response scale was used 1 not relevant, 2 somewhat relevant, 3 quite relevant but needs minor alteration, 4 very relevant.
This stage of the process aims to verify whether the items, the response scale and the instructions are comprehensible for the target population.
A 4-point response scale was used 1 not equivalent, 2 requires major alterations to be equivalent, 3 requires minor alterations to be equivalent, 4 equivalent.
Moreover, it was also proposed that a written explanation with the five options from the response scale be given to the interviewee in order to help them respond objectively.
The existence of maximum and minimum effects was observed when over 15.0% of the subjects opted for the lowest orfor the highest possible score in the response scale, respectively.
Entrainment plus a score≥3 on this scale, called Non-24 Clinical Response Scale(N24CRS) was required to be classified as a clinical responder.
The response scale to the questionnaire items can range from one to seven, and the sum ranges from 13 to 91, with higher scores meaning a stronger sense of coherence.
All questions were evaluated using a five point Likert response scale: 1- strongly disagree, 2- partially disagree, 3- I have no opinion, 4- partially agree and 5- strongly agree.
The existence of floor and ceiling effects are observed when more than 15% of participants make the choice of the lowest orhighest possible score for the response scale, respectively.
The assessment is measured through a seven-point response scale, where 1 indicates maximum impairment, and 7, no impairment; thus, the higher the final value, the better the patient's QoL.
After responding to each item of the scale, the participants were interviewed in order to investigate the difficulties perceived in relation to the understanding of the statements and the response scale, as well as to detect terms which were difficult to understand.
Each item has a 4-point Lickert response scale:"1- I haven't been doing this at all" to"4- I have been doing this a lot", in which the subject must evaluate the option which best describes her actions.
The questions ask how much of a problem each item was during the last month, andrespondents use a five-level response scale 0=never a problem; 1=almost never a problem; 2=sometimes a problem; 3=often a problem; 4=almost always a problem.
In response scale, the English option Often was translated and unchanged in the step of the expert Panel and subsequently the back-translation, with the final version of the translation for Many times.
One possible explanation for this finding may be related to the instrument's response scale, whose highly similar options may not have made it possible for participants to differentiate the alternatives.
As the 7-point response scale was used, 1 strongly disagree and 7 strongly agree to explore the degree of agreement with moral sensitivity, high scores indicate a higher degree of moral sensitivity.
The Brazilian version of the Morisky scale will be used. In the Brazilian version,a Likert-type response scale was used, of 4 to 5 points, varying from 1 Never to 5 Daily; 1 Never to 5 Always and 1 Never to 4 Always.
Due to the low variability in the response scale, items were dichotomized as very important scoring 4 or not very important scoring 3 or less, combining the answers not important, slightly important, and important for analysis.
Participants had to indicate to what extent the content expressed in each item was necessary orunnecessary to guarantee a dignified death by choosing a number on a 7-point response scale which varied from 1 totally unnecessary to 7 totally necessary See Annex.
It should be noted that the questions are organized by response scale, i.e., capacity, frequency, intensity or satisfaction and the scores range from 4 to 20 points, reflecting the worst and the best QoL, respectively.
Regarding the QoR-40 general evaluation, all participants considered the questionnaire good, 70% referred easy understanding of questions and54% reported difficulty with the response scale, which was higher in the group of patients aged 65 years or older 75.