Skip to main content

Table 2 Internal consistency reliability and responsiveness. Studies 3 and 4

From: Internal consistency reliability is a poor predictor of responsiveness

Study Instrument and domain Internal consistency reliability Standardised response mean#
Study 3 CRQ-IA   
     Dyspnea 0.73 0.94
     Fatigue 0.81 0.96
     Emotional function 0.77 1.35
     Mastery 0.76 1.09
  CRQ-SA   
     Dyspnea 0.78 0.86
     Fatigue 0.83 1.38
     Emotional function 0.89 1.00
     Mastery 0.86 0.86
  SF-36   
     Physical composite score 0.61 0.59
     Mental composite score 0.70 0.48
Study 4a ACL-QOL 0.96 1.45
  IKDC 0.86 1.17
  KOOS   
     Symptoms 0.74 0.64
     Pain 0.89 0.74
     Function 0.96 0.59
     Sports 0.92 0.83
     QOL 0.88 1.15
  SF-36   
     Physical Function 0.90 0.64
     Role Physical 0.79 0.67
     Bodily Pain 0.80 0.52
     General Health 0.72 0.11
     Vitality 0.87 0.44
     Social Functioning 0.81 0.50
     Role Emotional 0.82 0.33
     Mental Health 0.76 0.34
Study 4b WOMET 0.97 0.88
  IKDC 0.90 0.85
  KOOS   
     Symptoms 0.82 0.85
     Pain 0.93 0.95
     Function 0.97 0.82
     Sports 0.94 0.66
     QOL 0.90 0.71
  SF-36   
     Physical Function 0.93 0.59
     Role Physical 0.93 0.40
     Bodily Pain 0.88 0.60
     General Health 0.85 -0.08
     Vitality 0.86 0.08
     Social Functioning 0.84 0.25
     Role Emotional 0.88 0.12
     Mental Health 0.79 0.21
  1. ¶Cronbach's alpha
  2. # Change score (follow-up minus baseline) / standard deviation of change score
  3. * Pearson correlation coefficient