Check with the Intended Audience First! Content Validation as a Method for Inclusive Research for Primary Care Engagement in Rural Appalachia.

Journal of Appalachian health Pub Date : 2024-09-01 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.13023/jah.0601.06
Sydeena E Isaacs, Jennifer Schroeder Tyson, Ashley Parks, Danielle Adams
{"title":"Check with the Intended Audience First! Content Validation as a Method for Inclusive Research for Primary Care Engagement in Rural Appalachia.","authors":"Sydeena E Isaacs, Jennifer Schroeder Tyson, Ashley Parks, Danielle Adams","doi":"10.13023/jah.0601.06","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>To date, referral practices based on social determinants of health (SDOH) among primary care providers (PCPs) and clinic staff in rural regions, including Appalachian North Carolina (NC), are not well understood.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aims to develop and content validate a primary care engagement (PCE) survey to assess (1) engagement and burnout; (2) referral practices; and (3) self-efficacy and confidence in making referrals based on SDOH among PCPs and clinic staff in Appalachian NC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using the Social-Ecological Model as a theoretical framework, researchers developed a 37-item PCE survey. Content validation was completed by a panel of experts recruited from a convenience sample of faculty at a local university and PCPs and clinic staff practicing in Appalachian NC. Participants rated the degree of relevance of survey questions on a four-point Likert scale and provided additional feedback about the wording/appropriateness for the intended audience. Content validity index (CVI) scores were calculated for each question by averaging the degree of relevance ratings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten participants completed the study between August and November 2022 (nurse practitioners, academic researchers, clinical support staff/quality improvement associates, administrative staff supervisor, administrator/practice manager). CVI scores for each item ranged from 3.43 to 4.0. Comments regarding potential improvements were primarily focused on small edits, including grammar-related changes and opportunities for clarity and inclusivity.</p><p><strong>Implications: </strong>High CVI ratings for all survey items indicate the overall approach/survey aim resonates with local clinicians and individuals with expertise in SDOH. This study and the final survey lay the foundation for collaborative, collective-impact initiatives that are directly informed by the survey findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":73599,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Appalachian health","volume":"6 1-2","pages":"70-90"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11617017/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Appalachian health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13023/jah.0601.06","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: To date, referral practices based on social determinants of health (SDOH) among primary care providers (PCPs) and clinic staff in rural regions, including Appalachian North Carolina (NC), are not well understood.

Purpose: This study aims to develop and content validate a primary care engagement (PCE) survey to assess (1) engagement and burnout; (2) referral practices; and (3) self-efficacy and confidence in making referrals based on SDOH among PCPs and clinic staff in Appalachian NC.

Methods: Using the Social-Ecological Model as a theoretical framework, researchers developed a 37-item PCE survey. Content validation was completed by a panel of experts recruited from a convenience sample of faculty at a local university and PCPs and clinic staff practicing in Appalachian NC. Participants rated the degree of relevance of survey questions on a four-point Likert scale and provided additional feedback about the wording/appropriateness for the intended audience. Content validity index (CVI) scores were calculated for each question by averaging the degree of relevance ratings.

Results: Ten participants completed the study between August and November 2022 (nurse practitioners, academic researchers, clinical support staff/quality improvement associates, administrative staff supervisor, administrator/practice manager). CVI scores for each item ranged from 3.43 to 4.0. Comments regarding potential improvements were primarily focused on small edits, including grammar-related changes and opportunities for clarity and inclusivity.

Implications: High CVI ratings for all survey items indicate the overall approach/survey aim resonates with local clinicians and individuals with expertise in SDOH. This study and the final survey lay the foundation for collaborative, collective-impact initiatives that are directly informed by the survey findings.

首先与目标受众进行沟通!内容验证作为阿巴拉契亚农村初级保健参与的包容性研究方法。
迄今为止,包括北卡罗莱纳州阿巴拉契亚地区(NC)在内的农村地区初级保健提供者(pcp)和诊所工作人员基于健康社会决定因素(SDOH)的转诊实践尚未得到很好的理解。目的:本研究旨在开发和内容验证初级保健参与(PCE)调查,以评估(1)参与和倦怠;(2)转诊做法;(3) Appalachian NC地区pcp和临床工作人员基于SDOH转诊的自我效能感和信心。方法:以社会生态模型为理论框架,开展了一项包含37个项目的PCE调查。内容验证由一个专家小组完成,该小组从当地大学的教师和在Appalachian NC执业的pcp和临床工作人员的方便样本中招募。参与者对调查问题的相关性程度进行打分(李克特量表为4分),并就措辞/对目标受众的适当性提供额外的反馈。内容效度指数(Content validity index, CVI)得分通过对每个问题的相关度评分进行平均计算。结果:10名参与者在2022年8月至11月期间完成了研究(护士从业人员,学术研究人员,临床支持人员/质量改进助理,行政人员主管,管理员/实践经理)。每个项目的CVI得分从3.43到4.0不等。关于潜在改进的评论主要集中在小的编辑上,包括语法相关的更改以及清晰和包容性的机会。含义:所有调查项目的高CVI评分表明,总体方法/调查目标与当地临床医生和具有SDOH专业知识的个人产生共鸣。这项研究和最后的调查奠定了合作的基础,集体影响的举措,直接由调查结果告知。
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
审稿时长
9 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信