2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/163175
Category:
Abstract
Type:
Presentation
Title:
A new approach to determining content validity using a heterogeneous expert panel
Author(s):
Schilling, Lynne S.; Dixon, Jane K.; Lynn, Mary R.; Knafl, Kathleen; Grey, Margaret; Murphy, Kathy
Author Details:
Lynne S. Schilling, RN, PhD, University of Massachusetts Worcester, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA, email: lynne.schilling@umassmed.edu; Jane K. Dixon, PhD, Yale University School of Nursing; Mary R. Lynn, PhD, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Kathleen Knafl, PhD, Oregon Health Sciences University; Margaret Grey, DrPH, RN, FAAN, Yale University; Kathy Murphy RN, PhD
Abstract:
Purpose: The purpose of this poster presentation is to describe a process to evaluate the content validity of a new instrument using adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and parents of adolescents with TID, seen as the experiential experts, as well as diabetes clinicians and researchers. This work is part of a larger instrument development study (NINR, 7R01NR008579). Theoretical Framework: Self-management was conceptualized as involving three critical attributes: process, activities, and goals. Methods (Design, Sample, Setting, Measures, Analysis): This descriptive study utilized an expert panel composed of 1) adolescents with T1D and parents of adolescents with T1D (n=11), 2) diabetes clinicians (n=12) and 3) diabetes researchers (n=5) to evaluate items for the SMOD-A (Self-Management of Type 1 Diabetes in Adolescents), a self-report questionnaire designed to be used with adolescents aged 13-21 years. Adolescents and parents completed a questionnaire either in clinic or in their homes. Diabetes professionals received the same questionnaire, along with a cover letter, in the mail, and returned it by mail. A content validity index (CVI) was computed for the total group of experts (n=28) and for the experiential experts (n=11) for each of the instrument's initial 100 items. Results: Six items did not achieve an overall CVI of .80 and were eliminated from the SMOD-A. Additional analyses revealed 19 items for which the CVI of the experiential experts fell below .80, even while the CVI for the entire group was =.80. Of these, 8 items were eliminated, 9 were re-worded based on participant suggestions, and 2 items, thought to be clinically relevant, were retained. Conclusions and Implications: Utilizing experiential experts to evaluate the content validity of a new instrument resulted in eliminating or changing the wording on 17 (17%) items on the SMOD-A prior to field testing. Adolescent and parent experts made an important contribution to assessing the relevance and clarity of items.
Repository Posting Date:
27-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
27-Oct-2011
Conference Date:
2007
Conference Name:
19th Annual Scientific Sessions
Conference Host:
Eastern Nursing Research Society
Conference Location:
Providence, Rhode Island, USA
Description:
Conference theme: Building Communities of Scholarship and Research, held April 12-14, 2007 at The Westin Providence.
Note:
This is an abstract-only submission. If the author has submitted a full-text item based on this abstract, you may find it by browsing the Virginia Henderson Global Nursing e-Repository by author. If author contact information is available in this abstract, please feel free to contact him or her with your queries regarding this submission. Alternatively, please contact the conference host, journal, or publisher (according to the circumstance) for further details regarding this item. If a citation is listed in this record, the item has been published and is available via open-access avenues or a journal/database subscription. Contact your library for assistance in obtaining the as-published article.

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.type.categoryAbstracten_US
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titleA new approach to determining content validity using a heterogeneous expert panelen_GB
dc.contributor.authorSchilling, Lynne S.en_US
dc.contributor.authorDixon, Jane K.en_US
dc.contributor.authorLynn, Mary R.en_US
dc.contributor.authorKnafl, Kathleenen_US
dc.contributor.authorGrey, Margareten_US
dc.contributor.authorMurphy, Kathyen_US
dc.author.detailsLynne S. Schilling, RN, PhD, University of Massachusetts Worcester, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA, email: lynne.schilling@umassmed.edu; Jane K. Dixon, PhD, Yale University School of Nursing; Mary R. Lynn, PhD, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Kathleen Knafl, PhD, Oregon Health Sciences University; Margaret Grey, DrPH, RN, FAAN, Yale University; Kathy Murphy RN, PhDen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/163175-
dc.description.abstractPurpose: The purpose of this poster presentation is to describe a process to evaluate the content validity of a new instrument using adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and parents of adolescents with TID, seen as the experiential experts, as well as diabetes clinicians and researchers. This work is part of a larger instrument development study (NINR, 7R01NR008579). Theoretical Framework: Self-management was conceptualized as involving three critical attributes: process, activities, and goals. Methods (Design, Sample, Setting, Measures, Analysis): This descriptive study utilized an expert panel composed of 1) adolescents with T1D and parents of adolescents with T1D (n=11), 2) diabetes clinicians (n=12) and 3) diabetes researchers (n=5) to evaluate items for the SMOD-A (Self-Management of Type 1 Diabetes in Adolescents), a self-report questionnaire designed to be used with adolescents aged 13-21 years. Adolescents and parents completed a questionnaire either in clinic or in their homes. Diabetes professionals received the same questionnaire, along with a cover letter, in the mail, and returned it by mail. A content validity index (CVI) was computed for the total group of experts (n=28) and for the experiential experts (n=11) for each of the instrument's initial 100 items. Results: Six items did not achieve an overall CVI of .80 and were eliminated from the SMOD-A. Additional analyses revealed 19 items for which the CVI of the experiential experts fell below .80, even while the CVI for the entire group was =.80. Of these, 8 items were eliminated, 9 were re-worded based on participant suggestions, and 2 items, thought to be clinically relevant, were retained. Conclusions and Implications: Utilizing experiential experts to evaluate the content validity of a new instrument resulted in eliminating or changing the wording on 17 (17%) items on the SMOD-A prior to field testing. Adolescent and parent experts made an important contribution to assessing the relevance and clarity of items.en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-27T11:02:43Z-
dc.date.issued2011-10-27en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-27T11:02:43Z-
dc.conference.date2007en_US
dc.conference.name19th Annual Scientific Sessionsen_US
dc.conference.hostEastern Nursing Research Societyen_US
dc.conference.locationProvidence, Rhode Island, USAen_US
dc.descriptionConference theme: Building Communities of Scholarship and Research, held April 12-14, 2007 at The Westin Providence.en_US
dc.description.noteThis is an abstract-only submission. If the author has submitted a full-text item based on this abstract, you may find it by browsing the Virginia Henderson Global Nursing e-Repository by author. If author contact information is available in this abstract, please feel free to contact him or her with your queries regarding this submission. Alternatively, please contact the conference host, journal, or publisher (according to the circumstance) for further details regarding this item. If a citation is listed in this record, the item has been published and is available via open-access avenues or a journal/database subscription. Contact your library for assistance in obtaining the as-published article.-
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.