The Evaluation of Content Relevance and Representativeness of the New Stroke Risk Screening Scales.

Autor:	Ruksakulpiwat S; Department of Medical Nursing, Faculty of Nursing, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand., Voss JG; University of Nebraska Medical Center, College of Nursing - Omaha Division, Omaha, NE, USA., Challa AK; School of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA., Kudlowitz A; The College of Arts and Sciences, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Clinical nursing research [Clin Nurs Res] 2024 Nov; Vol. 33 (8), pp. 591-602. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Sep 09.
DOI:	10.1177/10547738241273864
Abstrakt:	Stroke is a leading cause of death and disability worldwide. Early and comprehensive risk identification is essential for identifying individuals at high risk for stroke. This study aimed to evaluate each question in the new Stroke Risk Screening Scales (SRSS) and assess the domains for content relevance and representativeness. Initially, six stroke experts were invited to evaluate the SRSS questions. The content validity index (CVI), including the item-CVI (I-CVI) and the average-CVI (Ave-CVI), was then calculated. In our study, the acceptable standards for I-CVI and Ave-CVI were ≥0.78 and ≥0.9, respectively. The results showed that all invited experts accepted the invitation and evaluated the SRSS questions. The previous version of the SRSS consisted of 33 questions. Of these, 30 questions reached an I-CVI of ≥0.78, indicating good content validity. Three questions had an I-CVI of 0.67 and were considered invalid; thus, they were deleted. The overall instrument achieved an Ave-CVI of 0.95. Comprehensive SRSS are essential for effective stroke prevention planning. By facilitating the early identification of individuals at high risk for stroke, these scales help reduce the incidence and impact of stroke. The high content validity found in this study supports the reliability of the SRSS as a screening tool. In the future, implementing such validated scales in clinical practice can improve early intervention strategies, ultimately enhancing health outcomes and optimizing the use of healthcare resources. Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu