Table II.
Interrater reliability for stringency scales and individual items for 10 state laws
| Scale/item | Two raters |
Three rates |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreement, % | Item reliability* | Item reliability†,‡ | ICC for scales§ | |
| Minors’ access | .91 | |||
| Age prohibited | 100 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
| Age accompanied | 50 | .19 | .28 | |
| Age must provide parental consent | 100 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
| Customer notification of risks | .95 | |||
| Warning signs | 70 | .60 | .80 | |
| Written warnings | 40 | .38 | .69 | |
| Customer acknowledgment | 60 | .75 | .88 | |
| Label of exposure schedule | 100 | 1.00 | .76 | |
| Customer UV exposure control | .89 | |||
| Limitations on frequency and duration | 80 | .76 | .89 | |
| Equipment standards | .89 | |||
| Timer system | 60 | .15 | .75 | |
| Timer shut-off | 100 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
| Timer testing | 80 | .47 | .81 | |
| Physical barriers | 90 | .74 | .81 | |
| Bulb replacement | 80 | .91 | .90 | |
| Eye protection | 70 | .47 | .70 | |
| Stand-up booth safety | 80 | .41 | .58 | |
| Facility operations | .97 | |||
| Licensing/registration | 90 | .74 | .81 | |
| License for each location | 80 | .60 | .58 | |
| Records of customer session | 90 | .93 | .96 | |
| Incident reporting | 100 | 1.00 | .95 | |
| Restrictions on advertising | 100 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
| Restrictions on price packages | 80 | .41 | .62 | |
| Operator training and responsibilities | .92 | |||
| Presence of trained operator | 100 | 1.00 | .76 | |
| Operation of timer | 100 | 1.00 | .96 | |
| Extent of training | 60 | .74 | .89 | |
| Proof of training | 100 | 1.00 | .85 | |
| Sanitation regulations | .87 | |||
| Eyewear | 100 | 1.00 | .76 | |
| Floors | 70 | .29 | .25 | |
| Towels | 100 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
| Bed/booth | 90 | .80 | .72 | |
| Enforcement/legal issues | .60 | |||
| Enforcement authority | 70 | .61 | .51 | |
| Funding for enforcement | 70 | .40 | .46 | |
| Inspections | 50 | .49 | .82 | |
| Complaint investigation | 70 | -∥ | -∥ | |
| Facility liability | 90 | .78 | .86 | |
| Penalties for violations | .80 | |||
| Penalties/fines for violations | 80 | .71 | .80 | |
| Overall | .95 | |||
ICC, Intraclass correlation; UV, ultraviolet.
*
Kappas are reported for nominal (dichotomous) items and weighted kappas for ordinal items.
†
The 3 raters are the two independent raters and the project consensus group.
‡
Kappas are reported for nominal items, and Kendall’s coefficient of concordance is reported for ordinal ratings.
§
Raters and states were considered random variables (two-way random effects model). Single measure reliability was used. For the two single item subscales, Kendall’s coefficient of concordance is used instead of the ICC.
∥
Kappa could not be computed because there was no variation for one rater.