ArticleBMC public health2024
Content and face validity of Workplace COVID-19 Knowledge & Stigma Scale (WoCKSS).
Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Development and validation and risk factor analysis of the colorectal cancer psychosocial distress scale.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has led to fear, rumours, and stigma, particularly against those infected with the virus. In Malaysia, the manufacturing industry is particularly vulnerable to COVID-19 clusters, making it critical to assess stigma attitudes among workers. To address this issue, The Workplace COVID-19 Knowledge & Stigma Scale (WoCKSS) was developed specifically for use in the manufacturing industry which served as the sample population for testing this scale. It was developed in the Malay language to ensure alignment with the local context. This study examines the content and face validity of WoCKSS, which can help assess the level of knowledge and stigma associated with COVID-19 among workers.
methodsThe WoCKSS was developed with 20 and 31 items for knowledge and stigma domains, respectively, based on an extensive review of COVID-19 literature. Content validation was conducted by four experts using a content validation form to assess the relevancy of each item to the intended construct. Content Validity Index (CVI) was calculated to measure the agreement between the experts on the relevance of each item to the intended construct. Face validation was then conducted by randomly selecting 10 respondents from the manufacturing industry, who rated the clarity and comprehension of each item using a face validation form. The Item Face Validity Index (I-FVI) was calculated to determine the clarity and comprehension of each question, and only items with an I-FVI ≥ 0.83 were retained.
resultsThe WoCKSS achieved excellent content validity in both knowledge and stigma domains. Only 19 items from the knowledge domain and 24 items from the stigma domain were retained after CVI analysis. All retained items received a CVI score of 1.00, indicating perfect agreement among the experts. FVI analysis resulted in 17 items for the knowledge domain and 22 items for the stigma domain. The knowledge domain achieved a high level of agreement among respondents, with a mean I-FVI of 0.91 and a S-FVI/UA of 0.89. The stigma domain also showed high agreement, with a mean I-FVI of 0.99 and a S-FVI/UA of 0.86.
conclusionIn conclusion, the WoCKSS demonstrated high content and face validity. However, further testing on a larger sample size is required to establish its construct validity and reliability.
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.