ArticleZdravstveno varstvo2024
Content Validity and Cognitive Testing in the Development of a Motivational Interviewing Self-Assessment Questionnaire.
Article in Zdravstveno varstvo, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Psychometric Validation of the Ultrashort Slovenian (OHIP-SVN5) and Croatian (OHIP-CRO5) Oral Health Impact Profile Questionnaires.Zdravstveno varstvo · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: To develop and content validate a self-assessment questionnaire on motivational interviewing (MI) practice as the first stages in forming the questionnaire to be used in cross-sectional studies involving practitioners conducting the MI-based alcohol screening and brief intervention (ASBI). Methods: A comprehensive mixed methods approach included a literature review, 3 rounds of expert panel (EP) opinions (n=10), cognitive testing (CT) with 10 MI-based ASBI practitioners, and questionnaire piloting with 31 MI-based ASBI practitioners. Based on the EP opinions in the second round, content validity indices (CVIs) and the modified kappa coefficient (k*) were calculated, focusing on the relevance and understandability of questions and comprehensiveness and meaningfulness of the response options. This analysis was performed in 2020, at the conclusion of the national "Together for a Responsible Attitude Towards Alcohol Consumption" ("Skupaj za odgovoren odnos do pitja alkohola", SOPA) project's pilot implementation. Results: On a scale level, CVI values based on universal agreement for the entire questionnaire were high for 3/4 categories (S-CVI-UA>0.80), and CVI values based on average agreement were high across all categories (S-CVI-Ave>0.90). At the item level, CVI values (I-CVI) were never <0.50 (automatic item rejection), and the modified kappa value (k*) indicated poor validity for two items in the understandability category (k*=0.33). All problematic parts of the questionnaire were further tested and successfully modified based on the results of CT, and accepted in the third round of testing. Conclusions: The final version of the questionnaire demonstrated appropriate content validity for use in studies among Slovenian MI-based ASBI practitioners and is now ready for further psychometric testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.