Đang chuẩn bị liên kết để tải về tài liệu:
Validity and reliability of the simplified Chinese patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events

Không đóng trình duyệt đến khi xuất hiện nút TẢI XUỐNG

The psychometric properties of the simplified Chinese version of the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) have not been assessed. Therefore, we aimed to assess its validity, reliability, and responsiveness. |

TÀI LIỆU LIÊN QUAN

Reliability, construct and discriminative validity of clinical testing in subjects with and without chronic neck pain

Validity and reliability of neonatal infant pain scale (NIPS) in neonatal intensive care unit in Vietnam

Reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the active-emphatic listening scale

Reliability and validity of the Norwegian version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire in patients with shoulder impingement syndrome

The Brazilian Portuguese version of the Exercise Adherence Rating Scale (EARS-Br) showed acceptable reliability, validity and responsiveness in chronic low back pain

Statistical validity and reliability of the Persian version of the Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET) according to the COSMIN checklist

Understanding validity and reliability from qualitative and quantitative research traditions

Inter-rater reliability and aspects of validity of the parent-infant relationship global assessment scale (PIR-GAS)

Does the SERVPERF instrument have reliability and validity in a higher education setting: The results from a university in Vietnam

Head-Eye movement control tests in patients with chronic neck pain; Inter-observer reliability and discriminative validity
Đã phát hiện trình chặn quảng cáo AdBlock
Trang web này phụ thuộc vào doanh thu từ số lần hiển thị quảng cáo để tồn tại. Vui lòng tắt trình chặn quảng cáo của bạn hoặc tạm dừng tính năng chặn quảng cáo cho trang web này.