4/8 asessment & narration of ADL&QOL

Mission:
1.The narration of ADL& QOL :
a. Mention out the main difference criteria between this two questionaires, so that the reader easy to understand and recognize it.


2.Figure out the interval time of latest PEP-R & PEP.

4/7 asessment & narration of ADL&QOL

Mission:
1.Calling TVGH rehabilitation center occupational therapist 顏老師,and make an appointment with them for explanation of ADL item bank and QOL questionaire.
2.The narration of ADL& QOL :
a. The arrangement of ideas:
1 .princles. 2.The general awareness of questionaire.
b. The writing of paragragh:
1.No need too polite and conventional verbal exchanges or informal sentencees.
2.Recheck each sentencees to figure out isn't there have any relation sentences.

4/3 asessment & narration of ADL&QOL

Mission:
1.I've finished about 4 of each BIB &ADL.
2.Have to wrting a letter for the author of FDT, that need to mention about we will try the FDT in our research and need to change some details on the chinese version.
3.Narration of ADL&QOL:
a. The main idea of ADL item bank didn't explain clearly and show the unique of the item bank.Why we need to make this item bank?
b. The main idea of QOL questionaire also need to re-arrangge the structure of sentencees.

4/2 PEP-3 & narration

Mission:
1.PEP-3
a.6raters from 3difference work place(NTUH's therapist,MHH's therapist and research assisstant).How to random between this 6people.

4/1 asessment & narration of ADL&QOL

Mission:
1. Amending the narration of ADL & QOL.
a.arrangement of ideas are not suitable.
b.procedure are not completely
c.adding the main idea of each questionaires

2.PEP-3 interrater reliability:
we consider out three kinds design:
a.three raters :2 observers,1 raters
not enough employee for the test.
b.two raters: 1 raters,1 observer
couldn't observe the diference between two raters
c.two raters: Random out one rater between two raters
Seem this design is suitable to our condition now!

3/31 assessment

Mission:
Answering the questions about the design of interrater reliability.
「施測者間信度」為不同施測者對相同對象施測所得結果的一致性，用以檢驗工具的評量結果是否受到施測者的主觀判斷影響。
1.Find out the advantage and disadvantage points?
代表性,可行性,有價值-->>basic point

2.Does this study design suitable with the clinical environment?
Ans:The number of the clinical therapists still need to complement, so the PEP-3 assessment couldn't have more than one rater(therapist) to take in.
The time spent to assess PEP-3 with 2 Raters comparing with one raters were almost similarly(about 30minutes), but may be related to the function level of the child.

3.Asking the clinicals T's about the efficiency of the study design?
Ans:Only one rater assess the examination will be suitable for clinical.

4.Find out the source's influence of the result?
Ans:T's experience,attitude and instructions will be the main influence of the result.

Other Q:
1.Find out the basic rule of different kinds interrater-reliability?
2.Writing out the inclusion and exclusion criteria?

3/28 assessment

Mission:
1.This week I've finished 10 ADL and BIB.
2.Remember to find Stroke OPD pateints for the testing of QOL.
3.Preparing the paper for explaining the content of ADL and QOL.

3/27 inter-rater reliability design

Mission:

1.find out the meaning of inter-rater reliability?
inter-rater reliability is the degree of agreement among raters. It gives a score of how much homogeneity, or consensus, there is in the ratings given by judges. It is useful in refining the tools given to human judges, for example by determining if a particular scale is appropriate for measuring a particular variable. If various raters do not agree, either the scale is defective or the raters need to be re-trained.

There are a number of statistics which can be used to determine inter-rater reliability. Different statistics are appropriate for different types of measurement. Some options are: joint-probability of agreement, Cohen's kappa and the related Fleiss' kappa, inter-rater correlation, concordance correlation coefficient and intra-class correlation.

2.Find out the advantage and disadvantage points?

3.Does this study design suitable with the clinical environment?

4.Asking the clinicals T's about the efficiency of the study design?
Only one rater assess the examination will be suitable for clinical.

5.Find out the source's influence of the result?
T's experience,attitude and instructions will be the main influence of the result.

3/26 Inter-rater reliability study design

Mission:

1.Learning to design an inter-rater reliability for PEP-3,we have find out 3 kinds of idea.one examinaiton need 30minutes ~1 hours for 2~3times, that will have another examination between 1 weeks.
a.three raters-one assess, the other two raters as an observer.
b.the first time is A rater, the second time is B Rater.
c.Only A rater assess,B rater as an observer.
The First idea needs more raters, more times, more efforts,learning effect and different instruction between two raters in examination.

Conclusion:
1.find out the meaning of inter-rater reliability?
2.Find out the advantage and disadvantage points?
3.Does this study design suitable with the clinical environment.
4.Asking the clinicals T's about the efficiency of the study design?
5.Find out the source's influence of the result?