Improve Research Reproducibility A Bio-protocol resource
Concise Method
tooltip

Reliability and Validity.

MR Melyssa Roy
PH Paul Hansen
TS Trudy Sullivan
FO Franz Ombler
MK Mathew Kiore
AS Andrew Stapleton
CC Craig Carr
request Request a Protocol
ask Ask a question
Favorite

The test-retest reliability of the experts’ answers was evaluated by repeating some of the trade-off questions and voting on them again. To evaluate face validity, the experts considered the intuitive plausibility of the relative importance of the criteria and levels implied by the weights.

As a further validity test, the experts’ consensus ranking of the 10 vignettes from stage 1 was used as a “pseudo-gold standard” to compare the ranking produced by the tool. Finally, a new sample of COVID-19 patient cases was used to check that they were appropriately differentiated with respect to the distribution of their scores from the tool.

Copyright and License information:  ©2021 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Society of Critical Care Medicine.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.

Do you have any questions about this protocol?

Post your question to gather feedback from the community. We will also invite the authors of this article to respond.

0/150

tip Tips for asking effective questions

+ Description

Write a detailed description. Include all information that will help others answer your question including experimental processes, conditions, and relevant images.

post Post a Question
0 Q&A