Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Nov 17.
Published in final edited form as: Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2014 Dec 22;53(1):93–108. doi: 10.1597/14-027

TABLE 9.

Comparison of Interrater Reliability for UK/I (Post 1) and NA (Rating 1) Samples: Kappas, Strength of Agreement, and Mean % Agreement

Parameter UK Post 1 NA Rating 1
Kappa Strength of Agreement* M % Agreement Kappa Strength of Agreement M % Agreement
Intelligibility .76 Good 48 .26 Fair 64
Voice .66 Good 81 .10 Poor 71
Hypernasality .70 Good 46 .71 Good 40
Hyponasality .48 Moderate 80 .39 Fair 73
Audible nasal emission .72 Good 63 .71 Good 71
Anterior oral CSCs .47 Moderate 54 .45 Moderate 47
Posterior oral CSCs .62 Good 64 .06 Poor 79
Nonoral CSCs .65 Good 63 .78 Good 83
Passive CSCs .75 Good 75 .55 Moderate 59
Need for intervention† .57 Moderate 71 .26 Fair 81
†

This was titled “Recommend STx” in the NA data.