The content validity index: are you sure you know what's being reported? Critique and recommendations.

By D. Polit, Cheryl Tatano Beck. Research in Nursing and Health, 2006

6,213 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Education, General Health Professions, Management Science and Operations Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/537d5a0f09968979b4cf4e8b0213a8f39257b393

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

In General Health Professions

In Management Science and Operations Research

Citations in the corpus

Content validity evidences in test development: An applied perspective (2012, methodology): “Content validity is therefore generally wlderstood as the degree to which a sample of items represents an adequate operational definition of the construct of interest (Polit and Beck, 2006).”
The Giving Voice to Mothers study: inequity and mistreatment during pregnancy and childbirth in the United States (2019, methodology): “We retained, revised, or discarded items based on best practice guidelines for content validation [36].”
Teaching Subtraction and Multiplication with Regrouping Using the Concrete–Representational–Abstract Sequence and Strategic Instruction Model (2014, methodology): “Measures to ensure content validity for the items used within the probes were conducted for each behavior or skill area using the item-level content validity index (Polit & Beck, 2006).”
The Smartphone Addiction Scale: Development and Validation of a Short Version for Adolescents (2013, neutral): “conducted by 7 experts [12].”
Factors Contributing to Academic Performance of Students in a Tertiary Institution in Singapore (2014, methodology): “The rated findings were used to calculate the content validity of individual items (I-CVI) and the content validity of the overall scale (S-CVI/UA) using the method described by Polit and Beck [42].”
Technical Adequacy of the SWPBIS Tiered Fidelity Inventory (2017, background): “…aSystems-level components needed for implementing at Tiers II and III. represent implementation of SWPBIS, which assists in assessing whether the items should be retained, revised, or removed, as well as whether the measure as a whole is valid (Polit & Beck, 2006; Waltz, Strickland, & Lenz, 2005).”
A Systematic Review of Assessment Literacy Measures (2014, methodology): “We considered both item-level (content validity index [CVI] values of 1.00 with three to five expert raters or >.78 with six or more raters; Polit & Beck, 2006) and scale-level (CVI, proportion of agreement >.90; Polit & Beck, 2006) forms of support.”
A psychometric toolbox for testing validity and reliability. (2007, methodology): “The published literature, including texts and research articles, include extensive definitions of validity and reliability, though many pertain to comprehensive exploration of a single psychometric concept (Polit & Beck, 2006).”
ABC of Content Validation and Content Validity Index Calculation (2019, methodology): “S-CVI/UA = (sum of UA scores)/(number of item) Note: The definition and formula were based on the recommendations by Lynn (8), Davis (5), Polit & Beck (6) and Polit et al. (7) www.eduimed.com 53 vi. S-CVI/UA: the average of UA scores across all items, for example the S-CVI/ UA [(1 + 0 + 0 + 1 + 1 + ”
Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for use in cross-cultural health care research: a clear and user-friendly guideline. (2011, methodology): “There are three methods to calculate S-CVI [20–22], but the averaging calculation (S-CVA/ Ave) method is preferred [22].”
Recalculation of the Critical Values for Lawshe’s Content Validity Ratio (2012, methodology): “…Tinsley & Weiss, 1975; James et al.’s r WG and r WG(J) indexes, 1993; and Lindell et al.’s r* WG(J) index, 1999), the Lawshe method has been endorsed in texts on personnel management (Lindell & Brandt, 1999) and endorsed for use in nursing research (Polit & Beck, 2006; Polit, Beck, & Owen, 2007).”
Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. (2007, methodology): “There are literally dozens of methods of calculating the degree to which two or more raters are consistent or congruent in their ratings (Stemler, 2004). As described by Stemler, the various methods can be classified into one of three categories: consistency estimates, consensus estimates, and measu”
Developing questionnaires for educational research: AMEE Guide No. 87 (2014, background): “Using experts to systematically review the survey’s content can substantially improve the overall quality and representativeness of the scale items (Polit & Beck 2006).”