Sentences with phrase «reported factor structure»

This study reports the factor structure of the symptoms comprising the General Health Questionnaire when it is completed in a primary care setting.

Not exact matches

Realized compensation is not a substitute for reported compensation in evaluating our compensation structure, but we believe that realized compensation is an important factor in understanding that the value of compensation that Mr. Musk ultimately realizes is dependent on a number of additional factors, including: (i) the vesting of certain of his option awards only upon the successful achievement of a number of market capitalization increase and operational milestone targets, including milestones that have not

Most of these systems are scalable to fit a company's unique recognition program budget, recognition frequency preferences, reporting structure and other factors.

Analyzing China, for example, the report balances that country's centralized planning and financial strength against countervailing factors such as its «endemic» corruption, repressive political structure, opaque legal system, and insistence that, in return for access to its vast market, foreign companies surrender proprietary intellectual property.

In 2005, the identification of an activating mutation in JAK2 (the V617F mutation) as a STAT5 - activating and disease - causing genetic alteration in a significant proportion of patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) has emphasized the oncogenic role of the JAK tyrosine kinases in hematologic malignancies.2 — 5 JAK2 is a member of the Janus tyrosine kinase family comprising three other mammalian non-receptor tyrosine kinases (JAK1, JAK3 and TYK2) that associate with cytokine receptors lacking intrinsic kinase activity to mediate cytokine - induced signal transduction and activation of STAT transcription factors.6 All JAKs share a similar protein structure and contain a tyrosine kinase domain at the C - terminus flanked by a catalytically inactive pseudokinase domain with kinase - regulatory activity, by an atypical SH2 domain and by a FERM domain that mediates association to the membrane - proximal region of the cytokine receptors.7, 8 Soon after the discovery of JAK2 V617F, we and others described that activating JAK1 mutations are relatively common in adult patients with T - cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and participate in ALL development allowing for constitutive activation of STAT5.9 — 11 Several STAT5 - activating JAK1 mutations were also reported in AML and breast cancer patients.10

Although vaccination induces an inflammatory response during pregnancy, the magnitude and the duration of response is much lower and shorter, respectively, for influenza vaccination than viral infection.27 Like infection, influenza vaccination during pregnancy has been reported to induce a transient increase in the levels of a number of proinflammatory cytokines, including interleukin 6, tumor necrosis factor α, and C - reactive protein.27 - 30 Studies on mice found an association between high interleukin - 6 levels during pregnancy and abnormal behavior and brain structure.19 However, in epidemiological studies, associations between maternal cytokine levels and ASD have been mixed.

The report focuses on three factors affecting the structure of dating and relationships: demographic projections (including life expectancy, population, ethnography, health), social projections (including marriage rates, alternative relationships, religious / cultural shifts) and technological shifts (rate of technological change, effects on labour market, emerging technologies).

Citing several factors that make learning more complex — increased diversity in our public school population, the inequity of out - of - school opportunities, and the increased role of technology in our lives — the report argues that many public schools are trying to respond by «overloading an outmoded structure.»

These authors reported disappointing results of their tests of the factor structures of the first two instruments, but the third measure proved to be more satisfactory in terms of its factor structure and its construct validity.

As the report points out, factors such as family structures, education, the number of children and other caring responsibilities will have an impact.

FMC gives the firm structured feedback in the form of a «report card» that assesses the firm on 6 factors: responsiveness, goals achievement, effectiveness, knowledge, predictive accuracy, and efficiency.

A professional with at least 30 hours of training / education on listening to and reporting the views of the child including: 6.5 hours on child development and structured interviews of children, research on children in family justice decision - making, and ethics of interviewing children; 6.5 hours on child interview skills including building rapport, child friendly interview environments, appropriate language usage and questions, and effectively reporting the views of the child; and 17 hours of other relevant education on topics such as the rights of children, research on the inclusion and exclusion of children in family justice decision - making, the impacts of family breakdown or transition on children, risks and protective factors for children in family justice processes, family dynamics of separation and divorce including high conflict family dynamics.

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 impulsiReport (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 impulsireport 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).

Several studies have replicated the PSC - 17's 3 - factor structure by using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) in moderate - sized samples, 26,27 and a number of studies28 — 37 have reported on the prevalence of risk by using the overall and subscale scores.

The current study provides evidence from a large national pediatric primary care sample that the rates of risk and reliability of the PSC - 17 found in the current sample were comparable to those reported in the original derivation study collected about 15 years earlier and that the previously identified factor structure fit the current data reasonably well.

This study shows that in a new national sample, the prevalence of risk, reliability, and factor structure of the PSC - 17 were comparable to those reported in the original derivation study, thus supporting its continued clinical and research use.

According to the report by Allen and Daly, «Father involvement partially mediates the effects of family structure on adolescent behavioral outcomes in that it reduces both the size and the significance of nearly all the statistically significant family structure effects on adolescent behavior, suggesting that father involvement is a critical factor in predicting adolescent behavioral outcomes.»

The Factor Structure of Tett s Self - Report Questionnaire of Emotional Intelligence Michelle M. Christensen, Wanwalai Charoenchote, & Kimberly A. Barchard University of Nevada, Las Vegas ABSTRACT Tett and

Brief report: Factor structure of parenting behaviour in early adolescence.

The four scales empirically derived in Study 1 were very similar — in terms of both item content and reduction — to the factor structure reported in a recent study examining a shortened version of the ERPSST [51].

Validating the factor structure of the Self - Report Psychopathy scale in a community sample.

Do the Chinese translations of the parent, teacher and self report versions of the SDQ have the same five subscale factor structure in this population as was demonstrated for the original English version in a UK population?

To investigate the internal structure of the FEEL - KJ, we attempted to replicate previous reports of an orthogonal two - factor structure (Adaptive and Maladaptive Emotion Regulation) with both EFA and CFA [26].

The investigation of the internal structure confirmed earlier reports of a two - factor structure with Adaptive Emotion Regulation and Maladaptive Emotion Regulation as overarching categories [26].

Several studies have addressed the validity of the parent - reported SDQ in school - aged samples, predominantly confirming the intended 5 - factor structure.5, 6 A 3 - factor configuration of externalizing (conduct problems and hyperactivity), internalizing (emotional and peer problems), and prosocial factors has also been proposed and suggested for use in epidemiologic studies and in low - risk populations.7, 8 The internal reliability of SDQ subscales has been predominantly examined by using Cronbach's α, a measure of the interrelatedness of items; however, α estimates are a lower bound for reliability and is often underestimated.9 A meta - analytic review reported weighted mean α coefficients extracted from 26 studies that showed generally modest reliabilities for parent reports (0.53 < α < 0.76).10 McDonald's ω, which estimates the proportion of a scale measuring a construct, typically yields higher reliability estimates but has rarely been used to assess reliability of the SDQ.

Table 1 reports summary statistics of the measured variables and the factor loadings of the hypothesized factor structure.

The first aim of the study was to test the validity of the YPI in a clinical sample, hypothesising the same factor structure as reported by Andershed et al. (2001).