Author:
Grand-Guillaume-Perrenoud Jean Anthony,Geese Franziska,Uhlmann Katja,Blasimann Angela,Wagner Felicitas L.,Neubauer Florian B.,Huwendiek Sören,Hahn Sabine,Schmitt Kai-Uwe
Abstract
AbstractBackgroundQuantitative and qualitative procedures are necessary components of instrument development and assessment. However, validation studies conventionally emphasise quantitative assessments while neglecting qualitative procedures. Applying both methods in a mixed methods design provides additional insights into instrument quality and more rigorous validity evidence. Drawing from an extensive review of the methodological and applied validation literature on mixed methods, we showcase our use of mixed methods for validation which applied the quality criteria of congruence, convergence, and credibility on data collected with an instrument measuring interprofessional collaboration in the context of Swiss healthcare, named the Swiss Instrument for Evaluating Interprofessional Collaboration.MethodsWe employ a convergent parallel mixed methods design to analyse quantitative and qualitative questionnaire data. Data were collected from staff, supervisors, and patients of a university hospital and regional hospitals in the German and Italian speaking regions of Switzerland. We compare quantitative ratings and qualitative comments to evaluate the quality criteria of congruence, convergence, and credibility, which together form part of an instrument’s construct validity evidence.ResultsQuestionnaires from 435 staff, 133 supervisors, and 189 patients were collected. Analysis of congruence potentially provides explanations why respondents’ comments are off topic. Convergence between quantitative ratings and qualitative comments can be interpreted as an indication of convergent validity. Credibility provides a summary evaluation of instrument quality. These quality criteria provide evidence that questions were understood as intended, provide construct validity, and also point to potential item quality issues.ConclusionsMixed methods provide alternative means of collecting construct validity evidence. Our suggested procedures can be easily applied on empirical data and allow the congruence, convergence, and credibility of questionnaire items to be evaluated. The described procedures provide an efficient means of enhancing the rigor of an instrument and can be used alone or in conjunction with traditional quantitative psychometric approaches.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference63 articles.
1. Artino AR Jr, La Rochelle JS, Dezee KJ, Gehlbach H. Developing questionnaires for educational research: AMEE Guide No. 87. Med Teach. 2014;36(6):463–74.
2. Ricci L, Lanfranchi JB, Lemetayer F, Rotonda C, Guillemin F, Coste J, et al. Qualitative Methods Used to Generate Questionnaire Items: A Systematic Review. Qual Health Res. 2019;29(1):149–56.
3. Beck K. Ensuring content validity of psychological and educational tests the role of experts. Frontline Learn Res. 2020;8(6):1–37.
4. Polit DF, Beck CT. The content validity index: are you sure you know what’s being reported? Critique and recommendations Res Nurs Health. 2006;29(5):489–97.
5. Polit DF, Beck CT. Nursing research : generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice. Tenth edition. ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health; 2017. p. 784.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献