Thank you very much for your time, kindness and your scientific adviser, they were very useful and valuable.Regarding the advices of Reviewer #1, I made the corrections:Statistical advices: * The authors report correlation coefficients of 1. This stands for perfect relations, which occurs very seldom in scientific research. The reviewer therefore requests to carefully check and provide reason for this. I checked and it had a mistake, now it is resolved. In the cases with correlation coefficients of 1 is alright and in the cases with (*) the program could not computed because all the individuals gave the some and equal answer in all variables in both moments.
*The internal reliability of some items was tested with the Cronbach's alpha. The use of Cronbach's alpha is based on the assumption that the level of measurement is interval or ratio. The presented scale merely has a nominal level of measurement. In that case the Kuder-Richardson Formula should be used. I changed to the Kuder-Richardson Formula.
*The way of presenting the level of significance (page 4/ line 14) is unusual. I changed it. On line 53 on the same page a level of significance (p < 0,01) is reported lower than p < 0,05. Recommendation: Discard the hint on line 14. All the data was made for a 5% significance level, in this case is the program that gave a 1% significance level. The interpretation of 1 means that all the individuals gave the same answer in the 2 moments with a one-week interval. I think now the results, as I said before are more clear and rich. The explanation of table 1 will be helpful to understand all the results of the correlations coefficients. About the "upper back" is the only item with variations in all three questions, I am sorry but I have to disagree! When we look to table 1 and 2 we saw variations: in proportions of pain and in the correlations coefficients, specially in neck and low back regions.Literature advices: * Reliability and validity are well investigated concepts in Public health and medicine. Recommendation: Use the standard literature for citation (page 3/line 2f). Already done.Thank you for your time, Kind regards, Cristina Mesquita 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 1
AbstractBackground The self-administered questionnaires are fundamental for clinical assessment and