Sentences with phrase «scale score across»

Similarly, when using the «good parent» scale score across all of these areas, our findings illustrate that a total of 50 adolescents (9.6 %) believed their parents needed to do more monitoring across these areas as a whole; 84 (15.8 %) adolescents believed their parents needed to monitor them less, and the remaining 387 (73.0 %) perceived their parents» monitoring to adequately compare to what a «good parent» should do.

Researchers then analyzed the connectivity of each participant's brain to determine a relationship between brain connectivity and Self - Related Sharing Scale score across participants.

Then, we conducted sensitivity analysis comparing the mean scale scores across age and gender among the complete cases, all of the available cases, and the imputed cases (coefficients and standard errors from 5 data sets were adjusted for the variability between imputations according to Rubin's rule).

Not exact matches

The crude nutrient - profiling score was transformed to a scale from zero to 100 to create consistency across all 3 NPSC categories [i.e., the Transformed Nutrient Profiling Scoring Criterion (T - NPSC)-RSB-.

Crude nutrient profiling score transformed to a scale from 0 to 100 to create consistency across all 3 NPSC categories.

And, elevated blood sugar could very well be even more widespread in other states across the nation, as California residents usually score near the top of the scale for longevity and healthy lifestyles.

So scaled, it would be easy to develop teacher and school scores, norms across a school district, and goals for statistically significant improvements over time.

Of particular concern are states such as North Carolina that use scaled scores to measure students» academic growth longitudinally across the entire spectrum of student performance.

The scale scores of low - income students in DCPS are higher than those of their peers in only Detroit and Cleveland (the two lowest - performing cities across the board), and they saw no statistically significant gains.

«The [Tulane] authors also report that the [academic] gains were not equal across groups: white students gained more than black students from the reforms,» according to the NEPC, also noting that a large - scale out - migration of higher income students may have resulted in inflated growth scores for the charter schools.

Scale scores allow for consistent reporting of assessment results across years for any specific grade and subject area.

Scale scores can not, however, be compared across other grades and subject areas.

A scale score is a mathematical conversion of the total number of points a student earned on an assessment into a score along a predefined scale, which allows for consistent reporting of assessment results across years for any specific grade and subject area.

A vertical score scale is needed to measure growth across multiple tests in terms of absolute changes in magnitude.

In doing this, the PiRA raw scores of 1,150 children from 56 schools across the country have been linked to the scaled scores achieved by the same children in their actual national tests *.

Because student achievement levels vary upon entry across schools, student growth measures are better measures of the impact of a school on student learning than a proficiency rate or average scale test score.

If a Likert scale questionnaire is used to give teachers more specific examples of knowledge and skills essential to each domain, teachers can easily average their scores across the domain to come up with a single number to plot in the diagram.

Owners evaluate their vehicle across 77 attributes that make up an overall brand score measured on a 1,000 - point scale.

As an emerging talent at age 34, a then - unknown Renzo Piano landed a commission to design the new Centre Pompidou in Paris, beating scores of prestigious firms across Europe and the U.S. Designed with Richard Rogers (one half of the now - defunct studio Piano and Rogers) and completed in 1977, the inside - out structure exposes its interior infrastructure, with color - coded vents, pipes, steel girding, and a massive escalator that scales the building facade.

Scores on this scale were compared across three groups:

Many of the scales demonstrated weak psychometrics in at least one of the following ways: (a) lack of psychometric data [i.e., reliability and / or validity; e.g., HFQ, MASC, PBS, Social Adjustment Scale - Self - Report (SAS - SR) and all perceived self - esteem and self - concept scales], (b) items that fall on more than one subscale (e.g., CBCL - 1991 version), (c) low alpha coefficients (e.g., below.60) for some subscales, which calls into question the utility of using these subscales in research and clinical work (e.g., HFQ, MMPI - A, CBCL - 1991 version, BASC, PSPCSAYC), (d) high correlations between subscales (e.g., PANAS - C), (e) lack of clarity regarding clinically - relevant cut - off scores, yielding high false positive and false negative rates (e.g., CES - D, CDI) and an inability to distinguish between minor (i.e., subclinical) and major (i.e., clinical) «cases» of a disorder (e.g., depression; CDI, BDI), (f) lack of correspondence between items and DSM criteria (e.g., CBCL - 1991 version, CDI, BDI, CES - D, (g) a factor structure that lacks clarity across studies (e.g., PSPCSAYC, CASI; although the factor structure is often difficult to assess in studies of pediatric populations, given the small sample sizes), (h) low inter-rater reliability for interview and observational methods (e.g., CGAS), (i) low correlations between respondents such as child, parent, teacher [e.g., BASC, PSPCSAYC, CSI, FSSC - R, SCARED, Connors Ratings Scales - Revised (CRS - R)-RSB-, (j) the inclusion of somatic or physical symptom items on mental health subscales (e.g., CBCL), which is a problem when conducting studies of children with pediatric physical conditions because physical symptoms may be a feature of the condition rather than an indicator of a mental health problem, (k) high correlations with measures of social desirability, which is particularly problematic for the self - related rating scales and for child - report scales more generally, and (l) content validity problems (e.g., the RCMAS is a measure of anxiety, but contains items that tap mood, attention, peer interactions, and impulsiscales demonstrated weak psychometrics in at least one of the following ways: (a) lack of psychometric data [i.e., reliability and / or validity; e.g., HFQ, MASC, PBS, Social Adjustment Scale - Self - Report (SAS - SR) and all perceived self - esteem and self - concept scales], (b) items that fall on more than one subscale (e.g., CBCL - 1991 version), (c) low alpha coefficients (e.g., below.60) for some subscales, which calls into question the utility of using these subscales in research and clinical work (e.g., HFQ, MMPI - A, CBCL - 1991 version, BASC, PSPCSAYC), (d) high correlations between subscales (e.g., PANAS - C), (e) lack of clarity regarding clinically - relevant cut - off scores, yielding high false positive and false negative rates (e.g., CES - D, CDI) and an inability to distinguish between minor (i.e., subclinical) and major (i.e., clinical) «cases» of a disorder (e.g., depression; CDI, BDI), (f) lack of correspondence between items and DSM criteria (e.g., CBCL - 1991 version, CDI, BDI, CES - D, (g) a factor structure that lacks clarity across studies (e.g., PSPCSAYC, CASI; although the factor structure is often difficult to assess in studies of pediatric populations, given the small sample sizes), (h) low inter-rater reliability for interview and observational methods (e.g., CGAS), (i) low correlations between respondents such as child, parent, teacher [e.g., BASC, PSPCSAYC, CSI, FSSC - R, SCARED, Connors Ratings Scales - Revised (CRS - R)-RSB-, (j) the inclusion of somatic or physical symptom items on mental health subscales (e.g., CBCL), which is a problem when conducting studies of children with pediatric physical conditions because physical symptoms may be a feature of the condition rather than an indicator of a mental health problem, (k) high correlations with measures of social desirability, which is particularly problematic for the self - related rating scales and for child - report scales more generally, and (l) content validity problems (e.g., the RCMAS is a measure of anxiety, but contains items that tap mood, attention, peer interactions, and impulsiscales], (b) items that fall on more than one subscale (e.g., CBCL - 1991 version), (c) low alpha coefficients (e.g., below.60) for some subscales, which calls into question the utility of using these subscales in research and clinical work (e.g., HFQ, MMPI - A, CBCL - 1991 version, BASC, PSPCSAYC), (d) high correlations between subscales (e.g., PANAS - C), (e) lack of clarity regarding clinically - relevant cut - off scores, yielding high false positive and false negative rates (e.g., CES - D, CDI) and an inability to distinguish between minor (i.e., subclinical) and major (i.e., clinical) «cases» of a disorder (e.g., depression; CDI, BDI), (f) lack of correspondence between items and DSM criteria (e.g., CBCL - 1991 version, CDI, BDI, CES - D, (g) a factor structure that lacks clarity across studies (e.g., PSPCSAYC, CASI; although the factor structure is often difficult to assess in studies of pediatric populations, given the small sample sizes), (h) low inter-rater reliability for interview and observational methods (e.g., CGAS), (i) low correlations between respondents such as child, parent, teacher [e.g., BASC, PSPCSAYC, CSI, FSSC - R, SCARED, Connors Ratings Scales - Revised (CRS - R)-RSB-, (j) the inclusion of somatic or physical symptom items on mental health subscales (e.g., CBCL), which is a problem when conducting studies of children with pediatric physical conditions because physical symptoms may be a feature of the condition rather than an indicator of a mental health problem, (k) high correlations with measures of social desirability, which is particularly problematic for the self - related rating scales and for child - report scales more generally, and (l) content validity problems (e.g., the RCMAS is a measure of anxiety, but contains items that tap mood, attention, peer interactions, and impulsiScales - Revised (CRS - R)-RSB-, (j) the inclusion of somatic or physical symptom items on mental health subscales (e.g., CBCL), which is a problem when conducting studies of children with pediatric physical conditions because physical symptoms may be a feature of the condition rather than an indicator of a mental health problem, (k) high correlations with measures of social desirability, which is particularly problematic for the self - related rating scales and for child - report scales more generally, and (l) content validity problems (e.g., the RCMAS is a measure of anxiety, but contains items that tap mood, attention, peer interactions, and impulsiscales and for child - report scales more generally, and (l) content validity problems (e.g., the RCMAS is a measure of anxiety, but contains items that tap mood, attention, peer interactions, and impulsiscales more generally, and (l) content validity problems (e.g., the RCMAS is a measure of anxiety, but contains items that tap mood, attention, peer interactions, and impulsivity).

Scale scores were means across items, with higher scores indicating more problems.

Regarding broad - band rating scales, information obtained may include scores that sum across all types of child behavior problems (ie, total global scale scores), scores that sum across types of internalizing problems such as depression and anxiety (ie, internalizing scale scores), and scores that sum across types of externalizing problems such as aggression and conduct problems (ie, externalizing scale scores).

The average effect size across broad - band measures using total global scale scores was 1.5.

This study could not compare child developmental outcomes across groups, but all children in the participating group score in normal health ranges at 12 and 18 months, as assessed by Bayley Scales of Infant Development.

Scores for frequency (husbands: α =.74; wives: α =.71) and interpersonal enjoyment (husbands: α =.80; wives: α =.58) were computed by averaging across the three items per scale.

Before computing the subscale scores (sum across nine items; theoretical range 9 — 54), missing values (one to eight missing item responses for 7 participants) were substituted by this participant's scale mean based on the nonmissing items to obtain sum scores.

For each subscale, all items across all ages were scored on a scale of 0 — 2 and summed together for a score ranging from 0 to 10, as described previously for conduct problem subscale.