The Saq Is A Computer Based Assessment Consisting Of 128 Likert Items On A Five Point Scale

The degree of freedoms was 9 and the significance level was 0.05. For these conditions, the chi-square value must be above 16.92. The test statistic provided no convincing evidence that the

The main instruments conducted in this study were both the AUDIT and DAST-20 assessments. Data was collected by the use of these two assessments administered in English or Spanish. Both tests were administered to each individually and independently. After the tests were administered they were able to be reviewed.

This is important because if the standardisation sample and Ruby’s demographic did not match, there could be chance of test bias (Sim and Wright, 2000). The reliability and validity measures obtained for the standardization sample do not indicate adequate reliability and validity for the target population (Papathanasiou, Coppens and Potagas, 2013)

Subjects that are given the SALCE are judged based on five factors. These factors would be considered the hits for this assessment and are as follows. First the SALCE takes into account the subjects test taking attitude. By categorizing the subjects based on a point system that will place the subjects in one of 6 categories of attitudes. The first attitude (a score of 0-7) suggests someone that could possibly be needing further exploration due to emotional vulnerability. The second attitude (score of 8-11) would be someone that may have low self-esteem or be self-critical. The third attitude (score of 12-17) would be a straight shooter, they answer the questions that are asked with little or no effort to give false answers. The fourth

The second assessment that another volunteer completed was the Outcome Questionnaire-45.2 (OQ-45.2). The authors of this assessment are, Michael L. Lambert, Jared J. Morton, Derick Hatfield, Cory Harmon, Stacy Hamilton, Rory C. Reid, Kenichi Shimokawa, Cody Christopherson, and Gary M. Burlingame. However, is important to mention that the main researcher for the OQ-45.2 for almost two decades is Dr. Michael Lambert. The publisher of the OQ-45.2 is the American Professional Credentialing Services, L.L.C and the original date of publication was 1994. However, the OQ-45.2 second edition was published on1996 and the third edition was published in 2004. The third edition was revised in January 2004, which is the one that the volunteer fill out for the purpose of this

| Based on explicit knowledge and this can be easy and fast to capture and analyse.Results can be generalised to larger populationsCan be repeated – therefore good test re-test reliability and validityStatistical analyses and interpretation are

It is a 21 item inventory rated on a five-point Likert scale ranging from zero (“not experienced”) to four (“great degree”). Participants are asked to describe a negative event that occurred in their life, and based on that event they answer the remaining questions. Questions include statements like, “I developed new interests” and “I discovered that I’m stronger than I thought I was.” It is comprised of five subscales including; new possibilities, relating to others, personal strength, spiritual change and appreciation of life (Tedeschi & Calhoun, 1996). Scoring is done by summing all of the questions: factors can be scored by summing the questions related to that factor. Higher scores indicate higher levels of posttraumatic

The items on the BDEFS-CA are easy to understand and to score. Inclusion of a long, short, and interview form provide the assessor with several options for administration. The psychometric properties of the BDEFS-CA are adequate. Although, increased research using the BDEFS-CA is recommended. Divergent and convergent validity were demonstrated using the adult version of the BDEFS-CA. The BDEFS-CA was normed online using a computer form. The BDEFS-CA is designed to be given in person using a paper and pencil format. The authors did not address if this change in formats effects the reliability of the

This measure test is relatively brief to administer and does not require costly or time-consuming scoring or interpretation procedures. This measure lends itself well to general use in research in the rheumatology clinic and evaluations with other healthy, psychiatric, and medical populations.

Thus, the choice by Richmond, Merrick, Green, Dinh, & Iedema (2011) to report p-values and confidence values (CI) in establishing the significance of the results assists in enhancing the reliability and validity of the study. Whereas, Tobiano, Chaboyer, & Mcmurray (2012) adopted thematic analysis in data analysis, which facilitated flexibility while maintaining research rigor. The straightforward nature of the thematic analysis also contributes in enhancing the validity of the provided evidence. In the case of Sand-Jecklin & Sherman (2014), the presentation of the findings in terms of means, standard deviation (SD), p-values and degree of freedom (df), coupled with the use of tables in presentation facilitated easier understanding of the values and identification of any trend likely to emerge. The presentation was critical in improving the validity of the findings

This study was limited due to the small sample size. Although the conclusions are valid, more research with a

The DASS 21 is a 21 item self-report questionnaire designed to measure the severity of a range of symptoms common to both Depression and Anxiety. In completing the DASS, the individual is required to indicate the presence of a symptom over the previous week. Each item is scored from 0 (did not apply to me at all over the last week) to 3 (applied to me very much or most of the time over the past week). The essential function of the DASS is to assess the severity of the core symptoms of Depression, Anxiety and Stress. Accordingly, the DASS allows not only a way to measure the severity of a patient’s symptoms but a means by which a patient’s response to treatment can also be measured.

All data retrieved from the screening database were entered into an Excel spreadsheet for analysis. Statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS Version 23 (SPSS IBM Inc, Chicago USA). Significance was taken as P<0.05 unless otherwise stated.

In this case, level of significance, α was not provided. Therefore, the analysis will be evaluated based on two α values which are:

The objective of this chapter is to describe the procedures used in the analysis of the data and present the main findings. It also presents the different tests performed to help choose the appropriate model for the study. The chapter concludes by providing thorough statistical interpretation of the findings.