IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v25y2016i11-12p1566-1575.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Instrument validation process: a case study using the Paediatric Pain Knowledge and Attitudes Questionnaire

Author

Listed:
  • Deborah Peirce
  • Janie Brown
  • Victoria Corkish
  • Marguerite Lane
  • Sally Wilson

Abstract

Aims and objectives To compare two methods of calculating interrater agreement while determining content validity of the Paediatric Pain Knowledge and Attitudes Questionnaire for use with Australian nurses. Background Paediatric pain assessment and management documentation was found to be suboptimal revealing a need to assess paediatric nurses' knowledge and attitude to pain. The Paediatric Pain Knowledge and Attitudes Questionnaire was selected as it had been reported as valid and reliable in the United Kingdom with student nurses. The questionnaire required content validity determination prior to use in the Australian context. Design A two phase process of expert review. Methods Ten paediatric nurses completed a relevancy rating of all 68 questionnaire items. In phase two, five pain experts reviewed the items of the questionnaire that scored an unacceptable item level content validity. Item and scale level content validity indices and intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated. Results In phase one, 31 items received an item level content validity index 0·90 and an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0·94 demonstrating excellent agreement between raters therefore acceptable content validity. Conclusion Equivalent outcomes were achieved using the content validity index and the intraclass correlation coefficient. Relevance to clinical practice To assess content validity the content validity index has the advantage of providing an item level score and is a simple calculation. The intraclass correlation coefficient requires statistical knowledge, or support, and has the advantage of accounting for the possibility of chance agreement.

Suggested Citation

  • Deborah Peirce & Janie Brown & Victoria Corkish & Marguerite Lane & Sally Wilson, 2016. "Instrument validation process: a case study using the Paediatric Pain Knowledge and Attitudes Questionnaire," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(11-12), pages 1566-1575, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:25:y:2016:i:11-12:p:1566-1575
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.13130
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.13130
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.13130?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:25:y:2016:i:11-12:p:1566-1575. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.