https://novaprd-lb.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/manager/Index ${session.getAttribute("locale")} 5 https://novaprd-lb.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/manager/Repository/uon:14568 0.60), three with moderate reliability (κ = 0.41 - 0.60), and two with fair reliability (κ = 0.21 - 0.40). Raters found it difficult to agree about the spectrum of patients included in a study (Item 1) and the correct application and interpretation of the test (Item 10). Conclusions: In this study, we found that QAREL was a reliable assessment tool for studies of diagnostic reliability when raters agreed upon criteria for the interpretation of each item. Nine out of 11 items had good or moderate reliability, and two items achieved fair reliability. The heterogeneity in the tests included in this study may have resulted in an underestimation of the reliability of these two items. We discuss these and other factors that could affect our results and make recommendations for the use of QAREL.]]> Wed 11 Apr 2018 16:28:28 AEST ]]> https://novaprd-lb.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/manager/Repository/uon:54270 Thu 15 Feb 2024 14:31:52 AEDT ]]> https://novaprd-lb.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/manager/Repository/uon:7397 Sat 24 Mar 2018 10:48:24 AEDT ]]> https://novaprd-lb.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/manager/Repository/uon:10326 Sat 24 Mar 2018 08:07:01 AEDT ]]>