Content Validation through Expert Judgement of an Instrument on the Nutritional Knowledge, Beliefs, and Habits of Pregnant Women

Abstract

The aim of this study was to conduct content validation through expert judgement of an instrument which explores the nutritional knowledge, beliefs, and habits during pregnancy. This is a psychometric study in which 14 experts participated in the evaluation of each of the questionnaire items, which were divided into two blocks according to the characteristics of sufficiency, clarity, coherence, and relevance. Fleiss’ κ statistic was used to measure strength of agreement. A pre-test with 102 participants was conducted to measure the degree of understandability of the instrument. The strength of agreement obtained for each of the dimensions was almost perfect. For each pair of experts, strength of agreement ranged between substantial and almost perfect. Sufficiency was the characteristic of the questionnaire that obtained the highest values in the two blocks, and was also the most statistically significant (p < 0.001). Coherence was the most statistically significant characteristic in the first block (p = 0.030). Clarity was the most statistically significant characteristic in the second block (p = 0.037). The wording of five of the twenty original items was corrected. The new version of the instrument attained a high degree of understandability. The results suggest that the instrument is valid and may therefore be applied.

Development and Validation of a Rating Scale of Pain Expression during Childbirth (ESVADOPA)

“…ESVADOPA was revised with basis on the judgement of a broad panel of experts made up of different health professionals with extensive experience in obstetrics and pain assessment, indicating a high content validity of the scale. According to the scientific literature consulted, there is no agreement on the number of experts who should participate in a validation, with some authors arguing for two judges [ 41 ] and others advocating approximately 30 [ 42 , 43 , 44 ]. Because a greater number of experts will lead to more information being collected on the scale [ 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 ], our expert panel comprised 36 professionals with extensive healthcare, teaching, and/or research experience related to childbirth pain.…”

Content Validation of an Instrument for the Assessment of School Teachers’ Levels of Knowledge of Diabetes through Expert Judgment

“…With regard to experience, Escobar-Pérez and Cuervo-Martínez [ 17 ] recommend that the expert group should include, among others, measurement and assessment professionals. As a result, in this study, two judges from the field of research and diagnostic methods in education were included, as reported in a study by Fernández-Gómez et al [ 18 ].…”

“…Data were processed using the statistical package SPSS, version 24.0, for Windows. As the instrument contained a number of categories of an ordinal nature, Fleiss’ κ coefficient was used to assess the degree of agreement between the judges [ 18 , 38 , 39 ].…”

“…Once selected, the experts make an assessment of the different dimensions of the questionnaire using a numerical scale as part of the procedure [10]. According to Fernández-Gómez et al [18], the said assessment should incorporate both qualitative and quantitative data. The process that judges undertake becomes a fundamental effort to eliminate unimportant aspects, modify aspects that need to be modified, and incorporate relevant aspects [15].…”

Development of Learning Media Android-Based for Physical Education with the Topic of Illicit Drugs in Facing the New Normal Era

“…Content validation through expert judgment is defined by [26] [27] as an informed opinion from individuals with a track record in the field who are regarded by others as qualified experts and who can provide information, evidence, judgments, and assessments. Thus, validation of printed modules by material experts, there are two validations carried out by material experts, namely validation of the content or module content and constructs validation.…”