ArticleNursing research
Conceptions of reliability revisited and practical recommendations.
Article in Nursing research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) measurement tools among children and adolescents in the Arab world: a scoping review.BMC public health · 2026Pooled it
- Students' perceptions of the rules and restrictions of gender at school: A psychometric evaluation of the Gender Climate Scale (GCS).Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- The Important Role of Stereotypes in the relation between Mental Health Literacy and Stigmatization of Depression and Psychosis in the Community.Community mental health journal · 2022Article
- Rejoinder: The Future of Reliability.Psychometrika · 2021Article
- Reliability Estimation in Multidimensional Scales: Comparing the Bias of Six Estimators in Measures With a Bifactor Structure.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Item-Score Reliability in Empirical-Data Sets and Its Relationship With Other Item Indices.Educational and psychological measurement · 2018Article
- Review of Issues About Classical Change Scores: A Multilevel Modeling Perspective on Some Enduring Beliefs.Psychometrika · 2018Review
- Confirmatory Factor Analysis Alternative: Free, Accessible CBID Software.Western journal of nursing research · 2018Article
- Best Alternatives to Cronbach's Alpha Reliability in Realistic Conditions: Congeneric and Asymmetrical Measurements.Frontiers in psychology · 2016Article
- Response to Sijtsma and van der Ark (2015): "Conceptions of reliability revisited and practical recommendations".Nursing researchArticle
- Psychometric Evaluation of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Fatigue-Short Form Across Diverse Populations.Nursing researchArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We discuss reliability definitions from the perspectives of classical test theory, factor analysis, and generalizability theory. For each method, we discuss the rationale, the estimation of reliability, and the goodness of fit of the model that defines the reliability coefficient to the data. Similarities and differences in the three approaches are highlighted. Finally, we provide a computational example using generated data to illustrate the differences among the different reliability methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25738624What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.