Sentences with phrase «items are problematic»

You can easily determine which items are problematic if you only feed one green food every 48 hours, then remove the offending item if needed.

«Member items are problematic because they really don't have a statewide benefit,» Lynam said.

Even with a sound framework, the translation into large - scale assessment items was problematic.

Not exact matches

But be advised that for larger department stores, return policies can vary, which can be problematic if you get duplicate items or something is not a good fit.

Even seemingly helpful items can also be problematic.

I believe the body is a master at cleaning and ridding itself of problematic items, in its own time and way, and inserting some foreign object into your body and then shooting water up inside to «clean it out» like we are a giant metal oil drum, is just the most insane idea.

I actually really love outlets because, despite the fact that the items being sold are «problematic,» I can't actually tell the difference, ha.

The next three new items are also problematic.

In a field test, test items are given to students, but the scores for those items are not applied toward students» test scores to prevent problematic items from negatively and unfairly affecting student grades.

It is worth pointing out, though, that there's a fairly prominent trunk lip on the Legacy, which could prove to be problematic to owners who'll be regularly lugging about heavier or more awkward - to - carry items.

For renters who own even a small collection of items that fall under this category, it's easy to see why this limit might be problematic.

Displaying larger items such as pet beds and bags of dog food can be problematic.

As he grows older and learns what is OK to chew and what isn't, you won't have to worry so much about «doggie - proofing» your house, but the simplest way to prevent problematic chewing is to keep valuable items out of Fido's reach.

It's not a major complaint, but when you're also fighting an enemy or trying to grab an item when going uphill, it can prove problematic.

-- Simultaneously Cliff has no answer to professionally authored rejection of the shopworn and discredited hypothesis he's now being conned into accepting, instead finds it better to «disappear» these problematic items from the sight of his readers.

Items 1 - 5 are less problematic if destroyed than currency or live checks, because often there are other ways to prove ownership or the existence of an obligation that are convincing.

This can be problematic if your bicycle costs more than your policy will pay for any one particular item.

Next, items that did not demonstrate significant item — total correlations with their expected factors, and factors with only one remaining item after problematic items were deleted (pressure to eat and food environment).

AUDIT - C scores were calculated by summing individual item responses across the first three AUDIT items, where higher scores indicate more problematic alcohol use.

First, several problematic items were dropped.

Reliability will be assessed using Cronbach's alpha, with a minimum acceptable cut - off at α = 0.70, but preferably at α = 0.80 or higher, particularly for the key variables86 and individual items will be checked to ensure that there are no problematic items for this patient population.

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 impulsivity).

Your relationship may be stable, even though you have identified some items on the relationship quiz that may be problematic.

Once finalizing the Urdu translated version of Passionate Love Scale (PLS) test try out was conducted on n = 15 individuals to identify the problematic and difficult items.

However, the reliability and validity of single - item measurement approaches are highly problematic and might be biased.

Clinical levels of problematic grief were defined as having an average item score...

These measures were examined by bilingual translators and problematic items were discussed to achieve consensus for the final translation.

On the basis of additional pilot work, this problematic item was later revised into «How often does it happen that you try to make others dislike someone?»

This resulted in elimination of five items that addressed parental support without a clearly collaborative component (that is, they addressed parent emotional support of the child's diabetes management, but did not clearly indicate the parent's involvement), three items that were redundant, and three items that were judged to be cognitively complex and therefore potentially problematic for pre-adolescents.

Items are rated on 5 - point Likert scale ranging from «never» to «often» or from «not characteristic» to «very characteristic», according to the occurrence of problematic behaviors in the child.

Some measures are long (e.g., 150 items), intrusive (e.g., videotaping a family meal), and / or time intensive (e.g., transcribing audiotapes and coding speech acts), which may be particularly problematic when trying to investigate or intervene with regard to a stressful event such as a newly diagnosed illness or an intensive medical regimen.