> As per telephone conversation, find attached:
>
> 1 instructions
> 2 rating sheet
> 3 sample item list
>
> If you have any comments/changes/concerns etc please let me have them
> by Monday (I have to try and get everything to Frank by Tuesday for a
> meeting with potential raters).
Found and been through. I've a number of suggestions. Many are minor
(e.g. spelling of "definitely") but I'm not sure if I'm missing an
overall explanation sheet. If not, it needs one and I've added
something to the top of the protocol sheet to spell this out.
I've put annotations in my revised word document but I doubt if these
will get saved to the WP5.1 version (see below). So here's the list:
1 If there isn't another sheet saying what this is all about I'd put
the following comment here (long introduction follows which should be
in WP51 version.
2 Is it always 108? Just checking!
3 I'd put all our names and contact info. here and then a page break and the rest of
this document.
4 I'd use the exact labelling from the score sheet. I've corrected your typo on
both ("definitely"!)
5 I wondered if this should go as there's no obvious place to put a comment.
6 Can you put them in the order they appear in the score sheet. Then you can
remove the numbers here and just embolden the key words, e.g.
"Clear", "Colloquial"....(or else replace the marginal numbers here
with those key words, perhaps that would be best).
7 Another one that should be placed lower down
Sorry that's pretty cryptic without the text.
>
> When you send me a list of people could you let me know what
> affiliation they are so I can make sure the same lists don't all go
> to family therapists etc
Will do.
>
> Many thanks
>
> ps The answer to Frank Margison and Graeme McGrath being on the MHF list
> is 'yes'. However, their computers do not accept attachments in
> Word, but Word Perfect 5.1, which will pose a problem, I assume.
I've added them (Graeme/Frank, please would you Email me to confirm
you've got this?!)
WP5.1 is a problem. We still have many people using that as default
around here and I suggest that in general we stick to using WfW and
assume that if people think they must look at something, they'll
Email and ask for a WP5.1 export. I'm posting the revised doc file
to the list separately from this message and also a WP5.1 export from
WfW as it's clear that Frank at least should get a chance to comment
on my suggestions.
I know from bitter previous experience that the exported files
often lose lots of formatting but I think the gist of things is
generally well preserved. Tables are the biggest problems as the
table handling is actually much more sophisticated in WP5.1 than WfW
which makes translation in either direction awful.
Chris Evans, Senior Lecturer in Psychotherapy.
Dept. Gen. Psychiatry, St. George's Hospital Medical School,
(London University), Cranmer Terrace, London SW17 0RE, Britain
Tel/fax.: (+44|0) 181 725 2540 Email: C.Evans@sghms.ac.uk
http://psyctc.sghms.ac.uk/
=============== M.H.F. Core Battery Study ==============================
This message was redistributed by the MHF study list:
mhf_study@psyctc.sghms.ac.uk
If you have technical problems with this message or the list, reply to:
Chris Evans <C.Evans@sghms.ac.uk>
The list is archived for WWW browsing at:
http://psyctc.sghms.ac.uk/mhf_study/list/index.htm
User name: Core_Battery Password: Duracell (both case sensitive)