Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations

被引:3392
作者
Polit, Denise F.
Beek, Cheryl Tatano
Owen, Steven V.
机构
[1] Humanal Inc, Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 USA
[2] Griffith Univ, Sch Nursing, Gold Coast, Qld, Australia
[3] Univ Connecticut, Sch Nursing, Storrs, CT USA
[4] Univ Texas, Hlth Sci Ctr, Sch Med, San Antonio, TX USA
关键词
instrument development and validation; methodological research; content validity;
D O I
10.1002/nur.20199
中图分类号
R47 [护理学];
学科分类号
1011 [护理学];
摘要
Nurse researchers typically Provide evidence of content validity for instruments by computing a content validity index (M), based on experts' ratings of item relevance. We compared the CVl to alternative indexes and concluded that the widely-used CVl has advantages with regard to ease of computation, understandability, focus on agreement of relevance rather than agreement per se, focus on consensus rather than consistency, and provision of both item and scale information. One weakness is its failure to adjust for chance agreement. We solved this by translating item-level CVls (I-CVIs) into values of a modified kappa statistic. Our translation suggests that items with an I-CVI of.78 or higher for three or more experts could be considered evidence of good content validity. (C) 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:459 / 467
页数:9
相关论文
共 22 条
[1]
CICCHETTI DV, 1981, AM J MENT DEF, V86, P127
[2]
[3]
Davis A.J., 1992, APPL NURS RES, V5, P104, DOI [10.1016/S0897-1897(05)80008-4, DOI 10.1016/S0897-1897(05)80008-4]
[4]
Fleiss J. L., 1981, Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions, V2nd
[5]
FLEISS JL, 1971, PSYCHOL BULL, V76, P378, DOI 10.1037/h0031619
[6]
Thinking both inside and outside the box on measurement articles [J].
Froman, RD ;
Schmitt, MH .
RESEARCH IN NURSING & HEALTH, 2003, 26 (05) :335-336
[7]
Grant JS, 1997, RES NURS HEALTH, V20, P269, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1098-240X(199706)20:3<269::AID-NUR9>3.0.CO
[8]
2-G
[9]
Content validity in psychological assessment: A functional approach to concepts and methods [J].
Haynes, SN ;
Richard, DCS ;
Kubany, ES .
PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, 1995, 7 (03) :238-247
[10]
ESTIMATING WITHIN-GROUP INTERRATER RELIABILITY WITH AND WITHOUT RESPONSE BIAS [J].
JAMES, LR ;
DEMAREE, RG ;
WOLF, G .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, 1984, 69 (01) :85-98