将问卷分析报告为可变衡量标准的客观评级量表的最佳做法。

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Accounts of Chemical Research Pub Date : 2024-03-13 Epub Date: 2023-10-17 DOI:10.7748/nr.2023.e1903
Odunayo Kolawole Omolade, John Stephenson
{"title":"将问卷分析报告为可变衡量标准的客观评级量表的最佳做法。","authors":"Odunayo Kolawole Omolade, John Stephenson","doi":"10.7748/nr.2023.e1903","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The best practice model states that the highest quality of scientific information in a discipline should be used when addressing pertinent problems. The usefulness of any measure depends on the least allowable error, which implies that best practice approaches must be used during analyses of rating scales. However, modern theories of objective measurement in advanced statistics suggest there are some shortcomings in reports of questionnaire analyses.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To highlight some common problems in questionnaire data and suggest techniques of constructing objective measures during rating scale analysis.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Questionnaires are frequently used as rating scales of latent variables, such as knowledge, anxiety and outcomes of treatments. However, reports of the steps involved before generating the final 'measures' often fail to present known limitations and robust solutions to the problems common to questionnaire data. Most designers of questionnaires generate variable measures for either educational or clinical research purposes without providing adequate explanations of the steps taken to address inherent limitations that may worsen the error terms in the outcome measure.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Cursory attention is given to the problems in questionnaire analysis as most users do not convincingly justify the measurement techniques they used before they present variable estimation. Reporting the techniques used to address data complexity by engaging objective measurement parameters ensures best practice and emphasises the credibility of the outcome measure.</p><p><strong>Implications for practice: </strong>Among researchers, using the techniques outlined here will lead to standardisation of questionnaire analysis and elimination of avoidable errors in constructing variable measures, resulting in high-quality data suitable for parametric statistics. For clinicians, these methods will simplify the interpretation of numerical measures to equivalent indicators on Wright maps, thus avoiding inconsistencies and misinterpretations of variable measure.</p>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Best practices in reporting analyses of questionnaires as objective rating scales of variable measures.\",\"authors\":\"Odunayo Kolawole Omolade, John Stephenson\",\"doi\":\"10.7748/nr.2023.e1903\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The best practice model states that the highest quality of scientific information in a discipline should be used when addressing pertinent problems. The usefulness of any measure depends on the least allowable error, which implies that best practice approaches must be used during analyses of rating scales. However, modern theories of objective measurement in advanced statistics suggest there are some shortcomings in reports of questionnaire analyses.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To highlight some common problems in questionnaire data and suggest techniques of constructing objective measures during rating scale analysis.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Questionnaires are frequently used as rating scales of latent variables, such as knowledge, anxiety and outcomes of treatments. However, reports of the steps involved before generating the final 'measures' often fail to present known limitations and robust solutions to the problems common to questionnaire data. Most designers of questionnaires generate variable measures for either educational or clinical research purposes without providing adequate explanations of the steps taken to address inherent limitations that may worsen the error terms in the outcome measure.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Cursory attention is given to the problems in questionnaire analysis as most users do not convincingly justify the measurement techniques they used before they present variable estimation. Reporting the techniques used to address data complexity by engaging objective measurement parameters ensures best practice and emphasises the credibility of the outcome measure.</p><p><strong>Implications for practice: </strong>Among researchers, using the techniques outlined here will lead to standardisation of questionnaire analysis and elimination of avoidable errors in constructing variable measures, resulting in high-quality data suitable for parametric statistics. For clinicians, these methods will simplify the interpretation of numerical measures to equivalent indicators on Wright maps, thus avoiding inconsistencies and misinterpretations of variable measure.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7748/nr.2023.e1903\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/10/17 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7748/nr.2023.e1903","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:最佳实践模式指出,在解决相关问题时,应使用学科中最高质量的科学信息。任何衡量标准的有用性取决于允许的最小误差,这意味着在分析评分表时必须使用最佳实践方法。然而,现代统计学中的客观测量理论表明,问卷分析报告存在一些不足。目的:强调问卷数据中的一些常见问题,并提出在评定量表分析中构建客观测度的技巧。讨论:问卷经常被用作潜在变量的评定量表,如知识、焦虑和治疗结果。然而,在生成最终“衡量标准”之前所涉及的步骤的报告往往无法提供已知的局限性和对问卷数据常见问题的有力解决方案。大多数调查问卷的设计者出于教育或临床研究的目的产生了可变的衡量标准,但没有充分解释为解决可能恶化结果衡量中错误术语的固有局限性而采取的步骤。结论:问卷分析中的问题引起了人们的关注,因为大多数用户在提出变量估计之前,并没有令人信服地证明他们使用的测量技术。通过采用客观的测量参数来报告用于解决数据复杂性的技术,确保了最佳实践,并强调了结果测量的可信度。对实践的启示:在研究人员中,使用本文概述的技术将导致问卷分析的标准化,并消除在构建可变测度时可避免的错误,从而产生适合参数统计的高质量数据。对于临床医生来说,这些方法将简化对赖特地图上等效指标的数字测量的解释,从而避免变量测量的不一致和误解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Best practices in reporting analyses of questionnaires as objective rating scales of variable measures.

Background: The best practice model states that the highest quality of scientific information in a discipline should be used when addressing pertinent problems. The usefulness of any measure depends on the least allowable error, which implies that best practice approaches must be used during analyses of rating scales. However, modern theories of objective measurement in advanced statistics suggest there are some shortcomings in reports of questionnaire analyses.

Aim: To highlight some common problems in questionnaire data and suggest techniques of constructing objective measures during rating scale analysis.

Discussion: Questionnaires are frequently used as rating scales of latent variables, such as knowledge, anxiety and outcomes of treatments. However, reports of the steps involved before generating the final 'measures' often fail to present known limitations and robust solutions to the problems common to questionnaire data. Most designers of questionnaires generate variable measures for either educational or clinical research purposes without providing adequate explanations of the steps taken to address inherent limitations that may worsen the error terms in the outcome measure.

Conclusion: Cursory attention is given to the problems in questionnaire analysis as most users do not convincingly justify the measurement techniques they used before they present variable estimation. Reporting the techniques used to address data complexity by engaging objective measurement parameters ensures best practice and emphasises the credibility of the outcome measure.

Implications for practice: Among researchers, using the techniques outlined here will lead to standardisation of questionnaire analysis and elimination of avoidable errors in constructing variable measures, resulting in high-quality data suitable for parametric statistics. For clinicians, these methods will simplify the interpretation of numerical measures to equivalent indicators on Wright maps, thus avoiding inconsistencies and misinterpretations of variable measure.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信