Cargando…

Validation of content and structure of the Return-to-work assessment for post-stroke survivors

BACKGROUND: Validation of an instrument consist of three main types: content, criterion and construct. Content validity needs to be determined in order for an instrument to be acceptable for use, validity establishes the fact that an instrument measures exactly what it proposes to measure. The Retur...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ibikunle, Peter O., Rhoda, Anthea, Smith, Mario R., Useh, Ushotanefe
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: AOSIS 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9634941/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36340938
http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajp.v78i1.1790
_version_ 1784824603985575936
author Ibikunle, Peter O.
Rhoda, Anthea
Smith, Mario R.
Useh, Ushotanefe
author_facet Ibikunle, Peter O.
Rhoda, Anthea
Smith, Mario R.
Useh, Ushotanefe
author_sort Ibikunle, Peter O.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Validation of an instrument consist of three main types: content, criterion and construct. Content validity needs to be determined in order for an instrument to be acceptable for use, validity establishes the fact that an instrument measures exactly what it proposes to measure. The Return-to-work assessment scale (RAS) was developed to measure three aspects of return to work: (Personal factors and/or issues, work issues and contextual factors) in 2021. OBJECTIVE: To report on the processes followed in establishing the face and content validity of the RAS. METHOD: Twenty participants took part in our study, they were selected purposively and conveniently from a pool of professionals and post stroke survivors. The Delphi survey technique was used to arrive at consensus and professional opinion on the items included in the RAS. Consensus was sought on the items, domains and subdomains included in the RAS that was used to assess return-to-work after a stroke. Our study was concluded after the third round. RESULT: One item was remove out of the original 86, three (3) domains made up of eleven (11) subdomains were retained. The RAS had consensus of 100% after three rounds of scrutiny for all items. CONCLUSION: The RAS was found to be valid, thereby establishing its face and content validity. CLINICAL IMPLICATION: The RAS is valid and was recommended for psychometric testing which was the next stage after face and content validity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9634941
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher AOSIS
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96349412022-11-05 Validation of content and structure of the Return-to-work assessment for post-stroke survivors Ibikunle, Peter O. Rhoda, Anthea Smith, Mario R. Useh, Ushotanefe S Afr J Physiother Original Research BACKGROUND: Validation of an instrument consist of three main types: content, criterion and construct. Content validity needs to be determined in order for an instrument to be acceptable for use, validity establishes the fact that an instrument measures exactly what it proposes to measure. The Return-to-work assessment scale (RAS) was developed to measure three aspects of return to work: (Personal factors and/or issues, work issues and contextual factors) in 2021. OBJECTIVE: To report on the processes followed in establishing the face and content validity of the RAS. METHOD: Twenty participants took part in our study, they were selected purposively and conveniently from a pool of professionals and post stroke survivors. The Delphi survey technique was used to arrive at consensus and professional opinion on the items included in the RAS. Consensus was sought on the items, domains and subdomains included in the RAS that was used to assess return-to-work after a stroke. Our study was concluded after the third round. RESULT: One item was remove out of the original 86, three (3) domains made up of eleven (11) subdomains were retained. The RAS had consensus of 100% after three rounds of scrutiny for all items. CONCLUSION: The RAS was found to be valid, thereby establishing its face and content validity. CLINICAL IMPLICATION: The RAS is valid and was recommended for psychometric testing which was the next stage after face and content validity. AOSIS 2022-10-27 /pmc/articles/PMC9634941/ /pubmed/36340938 http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajp.v78i1.1790 Text en © 2022. The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee: AOSIS. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License.
spellingShingle Original Research
Ibikunle, Peter O.
Rhoda, Anthea
Smith, Mario R.
Useh, Ushotanefe
Validation of content and structure of the Return-to-work assessment for post-stroke survivors
title Validation of content and structure of the Return-to-work assessment for post-stroke survivors
title_full Validation of content and structure of the Return-to-work assessment for post-stroke survivors
title_fullStr Validation of content and structure of the Return-to-work assessment for post-stroke survivors
title_full_unstemmed Validation of content and structure of the Return-to-work assessment for post-stroke survivors
title_short Validation of content and structure of the Return-to-work assessment for post-stroke survivors
title_sort validation of content and structure of the return-to-work assessment for post-stroke survivors
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9634941/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36340938
http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajp.v78i1.1790
work_keys_str_mv AT ibikunlepetero validationofcontentandstructureofthereturntoworkassessmentforpoststrokesurvivors
AT rhodaanthea validationofcontentandstructureofthereturntoworkassessmentforpoststrokesurvivors
AT smithmarior validationofcontentandstructureofthereturntoworkassessmentforpoststrokesurvivors
AT usehushotanefe validationofcontentandstructureofthereturntoworkassessmentforpoststrokesurvivors