Table 1.
Round | Raters (#) | Material characteristics
|
PEMAT characteristics
|
||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Materialsa (#) | Topics (#) | Language(s) | Total items | Understandability items | Actionability items | Response scale | Item instruction and examples | ||
1 | 8 | 16 (P = 11, A/V = 5) | 3 | English and Spanishb | 32 | 26 | 6 | 4 point | None |
2 | 12 | 12 (P = 8, A/V = 4) | 2 | English | 32 | 24 | 8 | 2 point | Few items had examples |
3 | 2 | 46 (P = 23, A/V = 23) | 33 | English | 32 | 25 | 7 | 2 point | Full user’s guide |
4 | 2 | 46 (P = 23, A/V = 23) | 33 | English | 32 | 25 | 7 | 2 point | Full user’s guide |
P = print materials, A/V = audiovisual materials; in rounds 1 and 2, Print refers to both websites and pdfs.
Spanish materials were not tested after round 1 because the reliability results were poor and we needed to limit the points of variation in our testing approach.