Face validity of an evidence-informed health policy graphic model: An e-Delphi study

IF 6.3 4区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Jacqueline M. Loversidge , Joyce Zurmehly , Gerene S. Bauldoff
{"title":"Face validity of an evidence-informed health policy graphic model: An e-Delphi study","authors":"Jacqueline M. Loversidge ,&nbsp;Joyce Zurmehly ,&nbsp;Gerene S. Bauldoff","doi":"10.1016/j.jnr.2025.03.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The Evidence-Informed Health Policy (EIHP) model, adapted from an evidence-based practice model, combines the best available evidence with other essential elements to inform and leverage the policymaking dialogue. The EIHP model was first described narratively; a graphic model was later designed but has not yet been evaluated.</div></div><div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>To ascertain the face validity of the graphic representation of the EIHP model.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A two-round e-Delphi method survey was emailed to 18 nurse experts in public health policy. The mixed methods survey used a 5-point Likert scale instrument (1, “strongly disagree,” to 5, “strongly agree”) to ask participants their views about the graphic model's structure and function. For any item scored as 3 or lower, the participant was invited to provide additional comments. A final open-ended item requested additional qualitative feedback.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>In the first round, 18 participants completed the 14-question survey (7 content-related and 7 process-related), which was accompanied by the graphic model and an explanatory narrative. Seven items achieved a mean score ≥4 (consensus ≥80 %) and were not repeated in the second round. Fifteen individuals completed the second-round survey, which comprised 7 items along with a graphic model that was modified according to first-round quantitative and qualitative feedback; a more detailed model narrative was also included. Fifteen participants completed the second-round survey. Final survey responses revealed that of the 14 items, 12 items reached 80 % consensus. The remaining 2 items reached more than 70 % agreement. Open-ended responses items facilitated a deeper understanding of participants’ perceptions of the graphic model.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The present study provides evidence of consensus to support face validity of this EIHP graphic model. Face validity furnishes the model with credibility and thus provides users with a level of confidence regarding its soundness as a guide to the policymaking process.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46153,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Nursing Regulation","volume":"16 1","pages":"Pages 44-52"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Nursing Regulation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2155825625000560","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The Evidence-Informed Health Policy (EIHP) model, adapted from an evidence-based practice model, combines the best available evidence with other essential elements to inform and leverage the policymaking dialogue. The EIHP model was first described narratively; a graphic model was later designed but has not yet been evaluated.

Purpose

To ascertain the face validity of the graphic representation of the EIHP model.

Methods

A two-round e-Delphi method survey was emailed to 18 nurse experts in public health policy. The mixed methods survey used a 5-point Likert scale instrument (1, “strongly disagree,” to 5, “strongly agree”) to ask participants their views about the graphic model's structure and function. For any item scored as 3 or lower, the participant was invited to provide additional comments. A final open-ended item requested additional qualitative feedback.

Results

In the first round, 18 participants completed the 14-question survey (7 content-related and 7 process-related), which was accompanied by the graphic model and an explanatory narrative. Seven items achieved a mean score ≥4 (consensus ≥80 %) and were not repeated in the second round. Fifteen individuals completed the second-round survey, which comprised 7 items along with a graphic model that was modified according to first-round quantitative and qualitative feedback; a more detailed model narrative was also included. Fifteen participants completed the second-round survey. Final survey responses revealed that of the 14 items, 12 items reached 80 % consensus. The remaining 2 items reached more than 70 % agreement. Open-ended responses items facilitated a deeper understanding of participants’ perceptions of the graphic model.

Conclusion

The present study provides evidence of consensus to support face validity of this EIHP graphic model. Face validity furnishes the model with credibility and thus provides users with a level of confidence regarding its soundness as a guide to the policymaking process.
循证卫生政策图形模型的面效度:e-Delphi研究
基于证据的卫生政策(EIHP)模式改编自基于证据的实践模式,将现有的最佳证据与其他基本要素结合起来,为决策对话提供信息并发挥作用。首先叙述了EIHP模型;后来设计了一个图形模型,但尚未进行评估。目的探讨EIHP模型图形表达的面部有效性。方法采用两轮e-德尔菲法对18名公共卫生政策护理专家进行电子邮件调查。混合方法调查使用5点李克特量表工具(1,“非常不同意”,到5,“非常同意”)询问参与者对图形模型的结构和功能的看法。对于任何得分为3分或更低的项目,参与者被邀请提供额外的评论。最后一个不限成员名额的项目要求提供更多的定性反馈。结果在第一轮中,18名参与者完成了14个问题的调查(7个与内容相关,7个与过程相关),并附有图形模型和解释性叙述。7个项目平均得分≥4(共识≥80%),在第二轮中没有重复。15个人完成了第二轮调查,其中包括7个项目以及根据第一轮定量和定性反馈修改的图形模型;更详细的模型叙述也包括在内。15名参与者完成了第二轮调查。最终的调查结果显示,在14个问题中,有12个问题达成了80%的共识。其余2项达成了70%以上的协议。开放式回答项目有助于更深入地理解参与者对图形模型的看法。结论本研究为支持EIHP图形模型的面效性提供了一致的证据。面孔效度为模型提供了可信度,从而为用户提供了一定程度的信心,使其能够作为决策过程的指导。
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
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
50
审稿时长
54 days
期刊介绍: Journal of Nursing Regulation (JNR), the official journal of the National Council of State Boards of Nursing (NCSBN®), is a quarterly, peer-reviewed, academic and professional journal. It publishes scholarly articles that advance the science of nursing regulation, promote the mission and vision of NCSBN, and enhance communication and collaboration among nurse regulators, educators, practitioners, and the scientific community. The journal supports evidence-based regulation, addresses issues related to patient safety, and highlights current nursing regulatory issues, programs, and projects in both the United States and the international community. In publishing JNR, NCSBN''s goal is to develop and share knowledge related to nursing and other healthcare regulation across continents and to promote a greater awareness of regulatory issues among all nurses.
×
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