Content Validity of Knowledge Questionnaire on HPV Infections, HPV Vaccination and Cervical Cancer

Main Article Content

Sudha Rani S
Raja A
Balasubramanian N

Abstract

Introduction: The significant stage in research is the construction of the tool. Validity is the initial step
in standardization of the tool. Content validity is the subjective agreement of professional experts that
the content of the scale logically appears to accurately reflect what it is intended to measure. This article
elaborates the significance and sequential steps of content validity.
Materials and Methods: The knowledge questionnaire on HPV infections, HPV vaccinations and cervical
cancers is a newly developed tool by the authors. It is a part of larger study. Eight experts have been selected
purposively after their consent. The experts were in the field of Nursing and OBG medicine. Based on the
experts opinion content value index (CVI) and content validity ratio (CVR) was computed.
Results: The computed value of content validity index is found to be anexcellent in both item interval and
scale interval. Content value ratio of the computed value is one. Hence, all the items has not been changed
and kept as it is for further process. This findings show that this knowledge questionnaire shows acceptable
validity.
Conclusion: This structured knowledge questionnaire isa significant tool in medical, nursing and health
sciences. It is mandatory to compute reliability for the further use. In this article, content validity procedure
was explained in detail which will be useful for the researchers in future.

Article Details

Section

Articles

Author Biographies

Sudha Rani S

Professor cum Vice-Principal, Ambika College of Nursing, Mohali

Raja A

Principal cum Professor, Unity College of Nursing, Mangalore

Balasubramanian N

Principal cum Professor, Ambika College of Nursing, Mohali

How to Cite

Content Validity of Knowledge Questionnaire on HPV Infections, HPV Vaccination and Cervical Cancer. (2021). International Journal of Nursing Care, 9(2), 30-34. https://doi.org/10.37506/ijonc.v9i2.16390

References