125 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31913715)
1. Is It Time to Go Positive? Assessing the Positively Worded System Usability Scale (SUS).
Kortum P; Acemyan CZ; Oswald FL
Hum Factors; 2021 Sep; 63(6):987-998. PubMed ID: 31913715
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Translation and validation of the System Usability Scale to a Dutch version: D-SUS.
Ensink CJ; Keijsers NLW; Groen BE
Disabil Rehabil; 2024 Jan; 46(2):395-400. PubMed ID: 36573399
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Dimensionality of the system usability scale among professionals using internet-based interventions for depression: a confirmatory factor analysis.
Mol M; van Schaik A; Dozeman E; Ruwaard J; Vis C; Ebert DD; Etzelmueller A; Mathiasen K; Moles B; Mora T; Pedersen CD; Skjøth MM; Pensado LP; Piera-Jimenez J; Gokcay D; Ince BÜ; Russi A; Sacco Y; Zanalda E; Zabala AF; Riper H; Smit JH
BMC Psychiatry; 2020 May; 20(1):218. PubMed ID: 32398111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. How Does the Valence of Wording Affect Features of a Scale? The Method Effects in the Undergraduate Learning Burnout Scale.
Zeng B; Wen H; Zhang J
Front Psychol; 2020; 11():585179. PubMed ID: 33117248
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Impact of changing positively worded items to negatively worded items in the Swedish web-version of the Quality of Recovery (SwQoR) questionnaire.
Jaensson M; Nilsson U
J Eval Clin Pract; 2017 Jun; 23(3):502-507. PubMed ID: 27650792
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Online dietary intake assessment using a graphical food frequency app (eNutri): Usability metrics from the EatWellUK study.
Zenun Franco R; Fallaize R; Lovegrove JA; Hwang F
PLoS One; 2018; 13(8):e0202006. PubMed ID: 30096211
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. On the dimensionality of the System Usability Scale: a test of alternative measurement models.
Borsci S; Federici S; Lauriola M
Cogn Process; 2009 Aug; 10(3):193-7. PubMed ID: 19565283
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Direction of wording and responses to items in oral health-related quality of life questionnaires for children and their parents.
Locker D; Jokovic A; Allison P
Community Dent Oral Epidemiol; 2007 Aug; 35(4):255-62. PubMed ID: 17615012
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Factor analytic and item response theory evaluation of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire in women with cancer.
Wu SM; Schuler TA; Edwards MC; Yang HC; Brothers BM
Qual Life Res; 2013 Aug; 22(6):1441-9. PubMed ID: 22903634
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Psychometric properties of the persian language version of the system usability scale.
Dianat I; Ghanbari Z; AsghariJafarabadi M
Health Promot Perspect; 2014; 4(1):82-9. PubMed ID: 25097841
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Measuring User Experience With 3, 5, 7, or 11 Points : Does It Matter?
Lewis JR
Hum Factors; 2021 Sep; 63(6):999-1011. PubMed ID: 31603695
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Differences in Multiple-Choice Questions of Opposite Stem Orientations Based on a Novel Item Quality Measure.
Adeosun SO
Am J Pharm Educ; 2023 Mar; 87(2):ajpe8934. PubMed ID: 35470171
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. A comparison of reliability and construct validity between the original and revised versions of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale.
Wongpakaran T; Wongpakaran N
Psychiatry Investig; 2012 Mar; 9(1):54-8. PubMed ID: 22396685
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Validation of the Polish version of the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS).
Konaszewski K; Niesiobędzka M; Surzykiewicz J
PLoS One; 2020; 15(8):e0237038. PubMed ID: 32776953
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Adaptation and Psychometric Validation of the EMPOWER-SUSTAIN Usability Questionnaire (E-SUQ) among Patients with Metabolic Syndrome in Primary Care.
Sahar NH; Badlishah-Sham SF; Ramli AS
Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2021 Sep; 18(17):. PubMed ID: 34502011
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Psychometric Analysis of the Czech Version of the Toronto Empathy Questionnaire.
Novak L; Malinakova K; Mikoska P; van Dijk JP; Dechterenko F; Ptacek R; Tavel P
Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2021 May; 18(10):. PubMed ID: 34067852
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Psychometric properties of the French versions of the Perceived Stress Scale.
Lesage FX; Berjot S; Deschamps F
Int J Occup Med Environ Health; 2012 Jun; 25(2):178-84. PubMed ID: 22528542
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Development of the Usability of Sleep Apnea Equipment-Positive Airway Pressure (USE-PAP) questionnaire.
Fung CH; Martin JL; Hays RD; Rodriguez JC; Igodan U; Jouldjian S; Dzierzewski JM; Kramer BJ; Josephson K; Alessi C
Sleep Med; 2015 May; 16(5):645-51. PubMed ID: 25890783
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. To be Direct or not: Reversing Likert Response Format Items.
García-Fernández J; Postigo Á; Cuesta M; González-Nuevo C; Menéndez-Aller Á; García-Cueto E
Span J Psychol; 2022 Oct; 25():e24. PubMed ID: 36210373
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The Loneliness Questionnaire-Short Version: an evaluation of reverse-worded and non-reverse-worded items via item response theory.
Ebesutani C; Drescher CF; Reise SP; Heiden L; Hight TL; Damon JD; Young J
J Pers Assess; 2012; 94(4):427-37. PubMed ID: 22404209
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
