The case for using the repeatability coefficient when calculating test-retest reliability
The use of standardised tools is an essential component of evidence-based practice. Reliance on standardised tools places demands on clinicians to understand their properties, strengths, and weaknesses, in order to interpret results and make clinical decisions. This paper makes a case for clinicians...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science
2013
|
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/16638 |
| _version_ | 1848749233771905024 |
|---|---|
| author | Vaz, Sharmila Falkmer, Torbjorn Passmore, Anne Parsons, Richard Andreou, P. |
| author_facet | Vaz, Sharmila Falkmer, Torbjorn Passmore, Anne Parsons, Richard Andreou, P. |
| author_sort | Vaz, Sharmila |
| building | Curtin Institutional Repository |
| collection | Online Access |
| description | The use of standardised tools is an essential component of evidence-based practice. Reliance on standardised tools places demands on clinicians to understand their properties, strengths, and weaknesses, in order to interpret results and make clinical decisions. This paper makes a case for clinicians to consider measurement error (ME) indices Coefficient of Repeatability (CR) or the Smallest Real Difference (SRD) over relative reliability coefficients like the Pearson’s (r) and the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC), while selecting tools to measure change and inferring change as true. The authors present statistical methods that are part of the current approach to evaluate test–retest reliability of assessment tools and outcome measurements. Selected examples from a previous test–retest study are used to elucidate the added advantages of knowledge of the ME of an assessment tool in clinical decision making. The CR is computed in the same units as the assessment tool and sets the boundary of the minimal detectable true change that can be measured by the tool. |
| first_indexed | 2025-11-14T07:17:41Z |
| format | Journal Article |
| id | curtin-20.500.11937-16638 |
| institution | Curtin University Malaysia |
| institution_category | Local University |
| last_indexed | 2025-11-14T07:17:41Z |
| publishDate | 2013 |
| publisher | Public Library of Science |
| recordtype | eprints |
| repository_type | Digital Repository |
| spelling | curtin-20.500.11937-166382017-09-13T15:43:55Z The case for using the repeatability coefficient when calculating test-retest reliability Vaz, Sharmila Falkmer, Torbjorn Passmore, Anne Parsons, Richard Andreou, P. The use of standardised tools is an essential component of evidence-based practice. Reliance on standardised tools places demands on clinicians to understand their properties, strengths, and weaknesses, in order to interpret results and make clinical decisions. This paper makes a case for clinicians to consider measurement error (ME) indices Coefficient of Repeatability (CR) or the Smallest Real Difference (SRD) over relative reliability coefficients like the Pearson’s (r) and the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC), while selecting tools to measure change and inferring change as true. The authors present statistical methods that are part of the current approach to evaluate test–retest reliability of assessment tools and outcome measurements. Selected examples from a previous test–retest study are used to elucidate the added advantages of knowledge of the ME of an assessment tool in clinical decision making. The CR is computed in the same units as the assessment tool and sets the boundary of the minimal detectable true change that can be measured by the tool. 2013 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/16638 10.1371/journal.pone.0073990 Public Library of Science fulltext |
| spellingShingle | Vaz, Sharmila Falkmer, Torbjorn Passmore, Anne Parsons, Richard Andreou, P. The case for using the repeatability coefficient when calculating test-retest reliability |
| title | The case for using the repeatability coefficient when calculating test-retest reliability |
| title_full | The case for using the repeatability coefficient when calculating test-retest reliability |
| title_fullStr | The case for using the repeatability coefficient when calculating test-retest reliability |
| title_full_unstemmed | The case for using the repeatability coefficient when calculating test-retest reliability |
| title_short | The case for using the repeatability coefficient when calculating test-retest reliability |
| title_sort | case for using the repeatability coefficient when calculating test-retest reliability |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/16638 |