Comparación de índices de validez de contenido para investigación en enfermería clínica: un caso práctico

IF 1.1 Q4 NURSING

Enfermeria Clinica Pub Date : 2025-05-01 DOI:10.1016/j.enfcli.2025.502214

Paulina Hurtado-Arenas , Miguel R. Guevara , Víctor M. González-Chordá

{"title":"Comparación de índices de validez de contenido para investigación en enfermería clínica: un caso práctico","authors":"Paulina Hurtado-Arenas , Miguel R. Guevara , Víctor M. González-Chordá","doi":"10.1016/j.enfcli.2025.502214","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To compare techniques to analyze the content validity of measurement instruments applicable to nursing care research through a practical case.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>Secondary study derived from validating the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety (HSOPS) in a Chilean hospital. The study setting was hospital care, with a population focused on nursing staff and a sample of 12 expert nurses who are teachers or have clinical experience in quality and patient safety. Design and content validity test based on three phases: identification of primary methods, calculation of methods, comparison of similarities and differences of methods.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Lawsche, Tristan-López, Lynn, Polit et al. methods are similar. The modified kappa value is similar to the content validity index (I-CVI) value, with a slight variation when penalizing the value by probability according to chance. There are significant differences between all methods and Hernández Nieto's content validity coefficient (CVC).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The Polit et al. method is more rigorous, and its mathematical formulation is better justified, providing solidity to clinical nursing research. Furthermore, the Hernandez-Nieto method is suggested when validating more than one characteristic.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46453,"journal":{"name":"Enfermeria Clinica","volume":"35 3","pages":"Article 502214"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Enfermeria Clinica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1130862125000269","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To compare techniques to analyze the content validity of measurement instruments applicable to nursing care research through a practical case.

Method

Secondary study derived from validating the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety (HSOPS) in a Chilean hospital. The study setting was hospital care, with a population focused on nursing staff and a sample of 12 expert nurses who are teachers or have clinical experience in quality and patient safety. Design and content validity test based on three phases: identification of primary methods, calculation of methods, comparison of similarities and differences of methods.

Results

Lawsche, Tristan-López, Lynn, Polit et al. methods are similar. The modified kappa value is similar to the content validity index (I-CVI) value, with a slight variation when penalizing the value by probability according to chance. There are significant differences between all methods and Hernández Nieto's content validity coefficient (CVC).

Conclusions

The Polit et al. method is more rigorous, and its mathematical formulation is better justified, providing solidity to clinical nursing research. Furthermore, the Hernandez-Nieto method is suggested when validating more than one characteristic.

查看原文本刊更多论文

临床护理研究内容有效性指数的比较：一个案例

目的通过一个实际案例，对比分析适用于护理研究的测量工具的内容效度。方法二级研究来源于对智利一家医院患者安全调查（hsop）的验证。研究环境是医院护理，人口集中在护理人员和12名专家护士，他们是教师或在质量和患者安全方面有临床经验。设计和内容效度检验基于三个阶段：确定主要方法、计算方法、比较方法的异同点。结果lawsche， Tristan-López, Lynn， Polit等人的方法相似。修正后的kappa值与内容效度指数（I-CVI）值相似，但在根据偶然性对该值进行概率惩罚时略有变化。各方法与Hernández涅托内容效度系数（CVC）差异显著。结论Polit等方法更为严谨，其数学公式更合理，为临床护理研究提供了坚实依据。此外，在验证多个特征时，建议使用Hernandez-Nieto方法。

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

Enfermeria Clinica NURSING-

CiteScore

2.00

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Enfermería Clínica is a peer-reviewed scientific journal that is a useful and necessary tool for nursing professionals from the different areas of nursing (healthcare, administration, education and research) as well as for healthcare professionals involved in caring for persons, families and the community. It is the only Spanish nursing journal that mainly publishes original research. The aim of the Journal is to promote increased knowledge through the publication of original research and other studies that may help nursing professionals improve their daily practice. This objective is pursued throughout the different sections that comprise the Journal: Original Articles and Short Original Articles, Special Articles, Patient Care and Letters to the Editor. There is also an Evidence-Based Nursing section that includes comments about original articles of special interest written by experts.