Development and Content Validation of Perceived Barriers to Exercise Questionnaire (PBEQ-I) for Indian Office Workers

Sougata Panda
{"title":"Development and Content Validation of Perceived Barriers to Exercise Questionnaire (PBEQ-I) for Indian Office Workers","authors":"Sougata Panda","doi":"10.24321/2278.2044.202325","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Physical inactivity worldwide is a major challenge in preventing various non-communicable diseases. In India, physical inactivity is observed in the average population, mostly in office workers involved with sitting or clerical jobs. Studies showed that there are different barriers, facilitators, and preferences for exercises that already exist for office workers. To our knowledge, no questionnaire currently addresses perceived barriers to exercise among Indian office workers. Objective: To measure self-reported perceived barriers to exercise for the employees working in the office. Methodology: This study has two essential components: domain and item development and content validation using the online Delphi method. The questionnaire was validated using the Content Validity Index (CVI) and modified Kappa, the most used quantitative method for calculating content validity. The questionnaire was validated by a panel of 13 experts in two rounds of validation. Results: The initial testing revealed low content validity for individual items (I-CVI range: 0.50 to 1.00) and moderate agreement (Kappa range: 0.27 to 1). After modifying and replacing items, the second round achieved acceptable scores (CVI: 0.85-1 and Kappa: 0.84-1). The final instrument had five domains and twenty-five questions. The domains were as follows: (1) personal barrier; (2) professional barrier; (3) social and family barrier; (4) preferences; and (5) knowledge barrier domain. Conclusions: Using an iterative methodology, the validation of the perceived barriers to exercise questionnaire (PBEQ-I) for Indian office workers revealed a high level of item-content validity for assessing the perceived barriers to exercise among office employees. Further reliability testing is required to validate this instrument’s psychometric qualities. How to cite this article:Panda S, Singh A, Bali3 S, Bhargava A. Development and Content Validation of Perceived Barriers to Exercise Questionnaire (PBEQ-I) for Indian Office Workers. Chettinad Health City Med J. 2023;12(2):33-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24321/2278.2044.202325","PeriodicalId":276735,"journal":{"name":"Chettinad Health City Medical Journal","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chettinad Health City Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24321/2278.2044.202325","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Physical inactivity worldwide is a major challenge in preventing various non-communicable diseases. In India, physical inactivity is observed in the average population, mostly in office workers involved with sitting or clerical jobs. Studies showed that there are different barriers, facilitators, and preferences for exercises that already exist for office workers. To our knowledge, no questionnaire currently addresses perceived barriers to exercise among Indian office workers. Objective: To measure self-reported perceived barriers to exercise for the employees working in the office. Methodology: This study has two essential components: domain and item development and content validation using the online Delphi method. The questionnaire was validated using the Content Validity Index (CVI) and modified Kappa, the most used quantitative method for calculating content validity. The questionnaire was validated by a panel of 13 experts in two rounds of validation. Results: The initial testing revealed low content validity for individual items (I-CVI range: 0.50 to 1.00) and moderate agreement (Kappa range: 0.27 to 1). After modifying and replacing items, the second round achieved acceptable scores (CVI: 0.85-1 and Kappa: 0.84-1). The final instrument had five domains and twenty-five questions. The domains were as follows: (1) personal barrier; (2) professional barrier; (3) social and family barrier; (4) preferences; and (5) knowledge barrier domain. Conclusions: Using an iterative methodology, the validation of the perceived barriers to exercise questionnaire (PBEQ-I) for Indian office workers revealed a high level of item-content validity for assessing the perceived barriers to exercise among office employees. Further reliability testing is required to validate this instrument’s psychometric qualities. How to cite this article:Panda S, Singh A, Bali3 S, Bhargava A. Development and Content Validation of Perceived Barriers to Exercise Questionnaire (PBEQ-I) for Indian Office Workers. Chettinad Health City Med J. 2023;12(2):33-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24321/2278.2044.202325
印度上班族运动障碍认知问卷(PBEQ-I)的编制与内容验证
背景:在世界范围内,缺乏身体活动是预防各种非传染性疾病的主要挑战。在印度,人们普遍缺乏体育锻炼,主要是坐着或文书工作的办公室职员。研究表明,对于上班族来说,锻炼有不同的障碍、促进因素和偏好。据我们所知,目前还没有调查问卷针对印度上班族在锻炼中遇到的障碍。目的:测量办公室员工自我报告的运动障碍。方法:本研究包括两个基本组成部分:领域和项目开发和内容验证使用在线德尔菲法。采用内容效度指数(Content Validity Index, CVI)和修正Kappa(最常用的内容效度定量计算方法)对问卷进行验证。问卷由13名专家组成的小组在两轮验证中验证。结果:初测单项内容效度较低(I-CVI范围为0.50 ~ 1.00),一致性中等(Kappa范围为0.27 ~ 1)。经修改和替换后,第二轮达到可接受的分数(CVI: 0.85 ~ 1, Kappa: 0.84 ~ 1)。最后一份文书有5个领域和25个问题。这些领域包括:(1)个人障碍;(2)职业障碍;(3)社会和家庭障碍;(4)偏好;(5)知识障碍域。结论:采用迭代方法,对印度上班族的运动障碍感知问卷(PBEQ-I)进行验证,结果显示,在评估办公室员工的运动障碍感知方面,项目内容的效度很高。需要进一步的可靠性测试来验证该仪器的心理测量质量。本文引用本文:Panda S, Singh A, Bali3 S, Bhargava A.印度上班族运动感知障碍问卷(PBEQ-I)的编制与内容验证。中国卫生与城市医学杂志,2013;12(2):33-40。DOI: https://doi.org/10.24321/2278.2044.202325
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信