Skip to main content

Table 2 ISII-1 Team: ICC scores and approved test spots

From: Five-year fidelity assessment of an evidence-based parenting program (GenerationPMTO): inter-rater reliability following international implementation

 

Rating Year

Coder

2016

(n = 7a)

2017

(n = 8)

2018

(n = 9)

2019

(n = 5)

2020

(n = 6)

Coder 1

.886

.831

.864

.831

.789

 

(n = 5)

(n = 8)

(n = 9)

(n = 4)

(n = 6)

Coder 2

.866

.869

.854

.927

.768

 

(n = 7)

(n = 8)

(n = 8)

(n = 5)

(n = 6)

Coder 3

.712

.936

.894

.882

.801

 

(n = 6)

(n = 7)

(n = 8)

(n = 4)

(n = 6)

Coder 4

.732

.879

.831

.700

.727

 

(n = 7)

(n = 7)

(n = 7)

(n = 4)

(n = 6)

Coder 5

.852

.848

.918

.749

.812

 

(n = 7)

(n = 7)

(n = 7)

(n = 5)

(n = 6)

Total Approved Spots

8

9

10

6

7

  1. The coder designation represents the same coders in Table 1. ICC scores represent a coder’s ratings minus their lowest score. The number of approved spots varies due to coders’ attendance. For example, Coder 1 attended nine meetings of 11 meetings in 2016, but was only present at 6 of the 8 meetings where spots were rated and approved for testing
  2. aThis value represents the number of approved spots minus one. The lowest score is dropped for each coder. For example, in 2016 there were 8 possible test spots; for a coder with perfect attendance, ICCs were calculated on their 7 best scores